HANDBOOK

FOR
STRUCTURAL EVALUATION AND OVERLAY DESIGN
OF FLEXIBLE ROAD PAVEMENTS BY
FALLING WEIGHT DEFLECTOMETER (FWD) TECHNIQUE

Weight Package

Loading Plate Deflection Sensors

D4 D5 D6
Bituminous layer D2 D3
D1
D0
Granular layer
Peak Deflection Bowl

Subgrade

Bilal Ahmed Barbhuiya

References:

1. IRC:115-2014 GUIDELINES FOR STRUCTURAL EVALUATION AND

STRENGTHENING OF FLEXIBLE ROAD PAVEMENTS
USING FALLING WEIGHT DEFLECTOMETER (FWD)
TECHNIQUE

2. IRC:37-2018 GUIDELINES FOR THE DESIGN OF FLEXIBLE

PAVEMENTS

3. IRC:82-2018 CODE OF PRACTICE FOR MAINTENANCE OF

BITUMINOUS ROAD SURFACES

4. AASHTO AASHTO GUIDE FOR DESIGN OF PAVEMENT

GUIDE-1993 STRUCTURES 1993
 CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
1. FALLING WEIGHT DEFLECTOMETER (FWD) TECHNIQUE
1.1 Principle of Pavement Evaluation using FWD
1.2 Working principle of FWD
1.3 Salient features of FWD
1.4 Process of Structural Evaluation and Overlay Design using
FWD technique
2. PAVEMENT CONDITION SURVEY & INVESTIGATION FOR FWD TEST
2.1 Necessity
2.2 Historical data
2.3 Pavement condition survey
2.4 Pavement condition Rating
2.5 Pavement investigation
3. DEFLECTION MEASUREMENT BY FWD
3.1 Estimation of sample size & measurement scheme
3.2 Identification of position of wheel path
3.3 Data to be recorded for deflection test point
3.4 Steps for measuring deflection at a test point
3.5 Precautions for measuring deflection with FWD
3.6 Processing of laod and deflection data
3.7 Identification of Homogeneous sections for structural design
4. BACKCALCULATION OF PAVEMENT LAYER MODULI
4.1 Principle of Backcalculation of layer moduli
4.2 ‘KGPBACK’- the backcalculation routine
4.3 Data input process in ‘KGPBACK’
4.4 Estimation of ranges of layer moduli for backcalculation
4.5 Correction of backcalculated layer moduli
5. STRUCTURAL EVALUATION & OVERLAY DESIGN
5.1 General
5.2 Remaining life method for structural evaluation
5.3 Mechanistic-empirical philosophy for flexible pavements design
and structural evaluation
5.4 Pavement Analysis using-IITPAVE
5.5 Structural Evaluation of in-service pavement using IITPAVE
5.6 Input process and operation of IITPAVE
5.7 Design of overlay
6. Outline of the process for structural evaluation and design of overlay
for in-service flexible pavement using FWD technique for Indian
highways.
 INTRODUCTION
A newly constructed pavement deteriorates with time due to increasing traffic
and different climatic stresses. Hence, serviceability level and load carrying
capacity gradually decreases during the design life of the pavement. When
preventive maintenance and periodical renewal measures are unable to
preserve the required serviceability level and significant distresses develop in
the pavement, structural evaluation in such events becomes necessary to
provide appropriate rehabilitation and strengthening measure. Sometimes,
there may be no directly observable indication of distress but there is
reduction in structural capacity in terms of future traffic. Structural evaluation
may also become necessary on expiry of the stage strengthening period of
bituminous courses of a pavement in order to provide required strengthening
measure for next courses of stage strengthening.

Structural evaluation can be either in the form of destructive testing by

digging test pit and coring in the pavement or based on non-destructive
technique (NDT) by deflection measurement. The widely used non-destructive
deflection measuring methods are Benkelman Beam Deflection (BBD) and
Falling Weight Deflectometer (FWD).

Benkelman Beam Deflection (BBD) technique has been the earliest method of
non-destructive structural evaluation technique for flexible pavement
worldwide. In this method, a static load is applied to the pavement surface
and rebound deflections are measured at one or more locations to determine
the overlay requirement in terms of the overlay thickness design curves. For
use of the Benkelman Beam Deflection (BBD) technique in India for structural
evaluation and design of flexible overlays, Indian Road Congress (IRC)
published the guideline “IRC-81: Guidelines for Strengthening of flexible Road
Pavements using Benkelman Beam Deflection (BBD) technique” based on the
findings of the Research Scheme R-6 of Ministry of Road Transport and
Highways, Govt. of India carried out during 1984 to 1990.

The BBD technique is known to have some limitations and its use may be
restricted for pavement having low volume of traffic and thinner bituminous
courses like premix carpet as pavement sections considered under R-6
scheme of MORT&H comprised thin and less stiff bituminous courses like BM
and Premix Carpet as opposed to modern pavements comprising thick and
stiffer bituminous courses like DBM and BC.

Limitations of Benkelman Beam Deflection (BBD) technique:

 Measurement of deflection done under a static load and hence does not
simulate the actual loading conditions produced in pavements by a moving
vehicle.
 Does not predict the properties of the different constituent layers of the
pavement.
 Underestimates the strength of stiffer and thick bituminous courses like
DBM and BC layers.
 Repeatability of test results is difficult
 Test result are likely to be affected by moving traffic on adjacent lanes
 Time consuming and labour intensive
 Unsafe to be carried out under heavy traffic conditions

In view of the above limitations of deflection measurement under static

loading, impulse loading equipment, commonly known as Falling Weight
Deflectometer (FWD) have been developed which closely simulates the
duration and amplitude of the load pulses produced by moving wheel loads
on pavement. Falling Weight Deflectometer (FWD) for deflection
measurement and various analytical tools for predicting elastic properties of
in-service pavement using deflection measurement are now in vogue
worldwide for structural evaluation.

Indian Roads Congress has recently published two guidelines for structural
evaluation and strengthening, one each for flexible pavement (IRC: 115
formulated based on MORT&H sponsored research scheme R-81) and rigid
pavement (IRC: 117) to address and overcome aforesaid short-comings of
the BBD method.

Salient features and working principle of Falling Weight Deflectometer (FWD),

method of deflection measurements by FWD, backcalculation of elastic
properties of pavement layers using backcalculation software as per the
guideline IRC:115-2014, Structural evaluation using backcalculated elastic
properties of pavement layers and design of overlay for strengthening of in-
service flexible pavement using linear elastic theory and analysis model as
per the IRC:37-2018 and procedures described in IRC-115 has been discussed
step by step with flow charts and examples in the following Chapters.
Procedure for use of Back-calculation Software “KGPBACK” and Pavement
Analysis Software ‘IITPAVE’ as prescribed by the above guide lines for flexible
pavement has also been illustrated.
FALLING WEIGHT DEFLECTOMETER
(FWD) TECHNIQUE
1
1.1. Principle of Pavement Evaluation using FWD

When a moving wheel load passes over a pavement it produces load pulses.
Normal stresses (vertical as well as horizontal) at a location in the pavement
will increase in magnitude from zero to a peak value as the moving wheel load
approaches the location. When moving wheel moves away from the location,
magnitude of stress reduces from peak value to zero.

Moving Wheel

εt Bituminous layer

Granular layer
εv
Subgrade

εt=Horizontal tensile strain

εv= vertical compressive stress

Fig-1: TYPICAL DEFLECTION BOWL OF FLEXIBLE

PAVEEMNT UNDER MOVING WHEEL LOAD

If the elastic deflections under deformed shape of the pavement produced by

a moving wheel load can be measured, the resulting load-deflection data can
be interpreted through appropriate analytical techniques, such as
backcalculation technique, to estimate the elastic moduli of the pavement
layers. The computed moduli are, in turn, can be used to evaluate remaining
life of in-service flexible pavement and determine overlay requirement, if any,
by calculating critical mechanistic parameters (such as vertical and horizontal
stress/strain at critical location within a flexible pavement system which are
responsible for pavement performance) using any linear elastic model and
comparing the same with the limiting values from performance models.

Among the equipment available for deflection measurement, the Falling

Weight Deflectometer (FWD) best simulates the loading conditions produced
by moving wheel load on a pavement. Hence, deflections measured by the
FWD and corresponding applied peak loads are extensively used for structural
evaluation of pavement and design of overlay using the principle as described
above.

1.2. Working Principle of FWD

The FWD is a non-destructive test device used to measure a pavement’s

response to applied, dynamic loading and simulates loads comparable to those
generated by traffic load on Pavement. The FWD produces impulse load by
dropping weights from different heights on a system of springs placed over a
circular loading plate and is equipped with displacement sensors (Geophones,
generally 07 nos.), spaced at different radial distances from the center of the
load plate (generally at 300mm intervals). The deflected shape of the
pavement surface produced due to application of an impulse load is measured
by the Geophones.

Figure 2 shows a schematic of the FWD loading configuration, the deflection

basin/bowl, and a typical flexible pavement structure. D0, D1, D2…. etc. are
deflection produced at different radial distances r1, r2……………, r6 due to
application of a peak load ‘P’ obtained by dropping mass ‘M’ from a drop height
‘H’.

Falling Mass ‘M’

Drop Height ‘P’

Deflection Sensors
Spring

Loading Plate
Rubber Pad

Bituminous layer D4 D5 D6
D2 D3
D0 D1

Granular Peak Deflection Bowl

layer

Subgrade

r1
r2
r6
FIG-2: SCHEMATIC OF WORKING PRINCIPLE OF FWD
Different magnitudes of peak load can be obtained by selection of a suitable
mass and an appropriate height of fall. The target peak load to be applied on
bituminous pavements is 40 kN (+/- 4 kN), which corresponds to the load on
one dual wheel set of an 80 kN standard axle load. The target peak load can
be decreased suitably if the peak maximum (central) deflection measured with
40 kN load exceeds the measuring capacity of the deflection transducer
(Geophone). Similarly, the load can be increased to produce deflection to the
minimum capacities of Geophones. If the applied peak load differs from 40
kN, the measured deflections have to be normalized (linearly interpolated) to
correspond to the standard target load of 40 kN.

For deflection test at a test location with a typical FWD device, the nos. of
mass drop can be chosen as 3 to 4 nos. The peak load and deflection data
corresponding to each load drops are recorded, normalized with respect to
40kN. The normalized deflection data and corresponding peak load provides
key parameters for evaluating the strength of pavement layers (layer moduli)
using appropriate backcalculation routine.

FWD are commercially available as trailer mounted as well as vehicle

mounted. The working principle of all these FWD models is essentially the
same. The device generally comes with software for automatic or manual
operation of the device and analysis of data acquired with wire-less
connectivity with an in-built data acquisition system in to the device. User can
programme nos. of mass drop, adjust the drop height and mass for a desired
peak load, calibrate load cell, geophones and temperature sensor for
measuring air and surface temperature with the FWD software. The Peak load
and corresponding deflection data acquired in to the FWD software can be
exported in to backcalculation software for back calculating layer moduli of
the constituent layer of the pavement. Some of the FWD device comes with
back-calculation software built into FWD software.

FIG-3: TYPICAL TRAILER MOUNTED AND VEHICLE MOUNTED FWD

WORKING PRINCIPLE OF FWD
1.3. Salient Features of FWD

A Typical Falling Weight Deflectometer contains the following main features:

1) Circular loading plate of 300mm or 450mm diameter. (300mm dia is

recommended). A rubber pad of 5 mm minimum thickness should be glued
to the bottom of the loading plate for uniform distribution of load.
Alternatively, segmented loading plates (with two to four segments) can
be used for better load distribution.
2) Free falling mass assembly (50kg. to 400kg.) Heavier models use falling
mass in the range of 200 to 700 kg. (HWD)
3) Impact height from 100mm to 600mm
4) Six to nine geophones for measuring deflection. The deflection transducers
used should have a reading resolution of at least 1 μm and should be
accurate to +/- 2 percent of the reading.
Typical geophone position configurations (number and radial distances
measured from center of load plate) commonly used for flexible pavement
evaluation are:
 7 sensors at 0, 300, 600, 900, 1200, 1500, and 1800 mm
 7 sensors at 0, 200, 300, 450, 600, 900, 1500 mm
 6 sensors at 0, 300, 600, 900, 1200 and 1500 mm
 6 sensors at 0, 200, 300, 600, 900, 1200 mm

7
5 6
4
2 3
1
CIRCULAR LOADING PLATE
WITH CENTRAL GEOPHONE

Fig-4: GEOPHONES ASSEMBLY IN A TYPICAL TAILORED MOUNTED FWD.

1.4. Process of Structural Evaluation and Overlay Design using FWD
Technique.

Structural evaluation exercise should include pavement condition assessment,

determining in-situ subgrade strength and pavement material investigations
besides deflection testing. The assessment of functional and structural
condition of the pavement should be made based on judicial evaluation of all
relevant information collected from the aforesaid investigations. The following
is the outline of the process, which shall be exercised for comprehensive
structural evaluation and design of overlay using falling weight deflectomer
(FWD) technique. The each of the exercise are described in detail in the next
chapters.

1. Collection of historical data about the pavement, pavement condition

survey and distress study, pavement material investigation and tests,
identification of pavement layer thickness etc.
2. Identification of section of uniform performance and determining the
sample size and location (test points) for deflection measurements.
3. Deflection measurement on sections of uniform performance of the
pavement using FWD with a min. of 03 load drops at each test location.
4. Processing of Peak load and measured deflection data for data correction,
mean-value at each test location and normalization of load data w.r.t to
the standard target load of 40 KN.
5. Determination of the ranges of modular value for each constituent layer
of pavement as per the recommended process and tests on pavement
materials.
6. Back-calculation of layer moduli for each section of uniform performance
using any approved backcalculation procedure or using IIT-KGPBACK
backcalculation software as prescribed by IRC:115-2014.
7. Correction of backcalculated layer moduli for temperature and seasonal
variation as per the guidelines of IRC:115-2014.
8. Determination of homogenous section as per the cumulative difference
approach for structural evaluation and overlay design.
9. Estimation of Design Traffic of the in-service flexible pavement as per the
guidelines of IRC:37-2018.
10. Structural evaluation of the in-service pavement by analysing with a linear
elastic pavement design software and comparing with the performance
models for fatigue and rutting life as prescribed by IRC:37-2018.
11. Strengthening of the deficient homogeneous section(s) by designing
overlay using linear-elastic pavement design software and satisfying the
performance criteria for fatigue and rutting life for the estimated design
traffic following the guidelines of IRC:37-2018 and IRC:115-2014.
 FLOWCHART FOR FWD TECHNIQUE

Pavement Condition & Material Investigation

Determination of Sections of Unifrom Performnce

(Good/Poor/fair)

Determinations of Sample size and test location for

deflection measurement

Defelction measurement with FWD

Processing Load and deflection Data

Estimation of ranges of layer moduli

Back-calculation of layer moduli & correction for

temparature and seasonal variation

Determination of Homogenous Section

Estimation of Design Traffic

Structural Evaluation by Residual life Method.

Design of Overlay
PAVEMENT CONDITION SURVEY AND
2
INVESTIGATION FOR FWD TEST
2.1 Necessity

Pavement condition survey for FWD test is primarily intended to find out the
section of uniform performance, based on which the sample size for deflection
measurement is ascertained. Condition survey along with various pavement
investigation methods such as test pit, coring, laboratory tests on material of
pavement etc. helps to figure out the actual causes of distress in the
pavement, some of which may not be related to structural deficeiency of the
pavement and could be prevented by taking preventive maintenance
treatments. The survey and investigation also help to evaluate different
rehabilitation alternatives such as recycling, partial reconstruction, etc. for
sections of pavement where structural rehabilation by overlay does not fit.

The following are the broad categories of survey, investigation and data
collection exercise which shall be undertaken befrore proceeding for defelction
measurement with FWD:
 Historical data about the pavement
 Pavement Condition survey
 Pavement cross-section examination &
 Tests on Subgrade characteristics.

2.2 Historical data

 Past condition and inventory data of the pavement

 Intitial pavement design, method and design basis.
 Past traffic volume history, axle load spectrum data.
 Past distress data, effectiveness of maintenance and rehabilitation
measure if any undertaken
 Data regarding functional and structural evaluation carried out if the
existing surface is an overlay
 Climatic condition data regarding rainfall intensity, temperature,
flood and submergence of pavement, high water table, etc.
 Internal and external drainage arrangement made
 Quality control test results & laboratory testing results on different
materials used
 ‘As constructed' pavement details and Construction methods
adopted
Review of the above historical data can be useful in identifying the reasons
for different distresses and in establishing whether the distresses were caused
by deficiency in design, poor material selection, improper construction and
other reasons such as high water table and poor drainage. Action accordingly
can be undertaken for future strengthening and rehabilitation programme.

2.3 Pavement Condition Survey

Pavement condition survey shall be undertken for identifying various distress

in the pavement surface and finally classifying the pavement into sections of
unifrom performnace based on any recommended pavement distress based
rating. Classification of pavement into various section of unifrom performance
such as good, fair and poor helps in determining the sample size for
conducting defelction test on the pavement.

Pavement condition survey may be done visually or as per actual

measurement of the distress. In project level based maintenance strtegies,
more precise condition data may be required and hence actual measurements
of the distress need to be measured in smaller representative section.

Each lane of the carriageway and the shoulder should be divided separately
into blocks of 50 m length and one-lane width (3.5 m) and distress should be
recorded for each block. Paved shoulders should be divided into blocks of 50
m length and pavement shoulder width.

The measurement for the following distress type need to be taken and
recorded in suitable mapping formats :

 Cracking (alligator (fatigue) /longituduinal/transverse cracking)

 Ravelling
 Potholes
 Shoving
 Patching
 Depressions/settlements
 Rut Depth

Mapping formats as prescribed by the guidline, IRC:82-2015 (Code of Practice

for maintenance of Bitumnoius surface) and menthod of rating may be
followed. Alternatively, mapping formats may be devised as per the criteria
of classification of pavement based on measurement of distress type as
indicated in the guidline IRC:115-2014.

Recording formats and method of rating of pavement as dictated by the codes

are presented here for refrence and use.
 PROFORMA-1
VISUAL SURFACE DISTRESS MEASUREMENT
Name of the Road: Carriageway width (m) :

Chainage of Test Section: Km……………to Km………… Date of Observation :

Type of Surface: Weather Condition :

Chainage Drainage
Patch Edge Rut
From To Cracks Potholes Bleeding Depression Ravelling Shoving and
Work Breaking Depth Total
(%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) Shoulder
(%) (%) (mm)
condition

Checked by: Recorded by:

Format as per IRC:82-2015
 PROFORMA-2

MEASUREMENT OF SURFACE DISTRESS

Name and no. of the Road: Carriageway width (m) :

Chainage of Test Section: Km……………to Km………… Date of Observation :

Chainage of Sub-section: Km……………to Km………… Weather Condition :

Type of Surface:
Depression/
Edge Remarks
Crack with type Patch Work Potholes Bleeding Settlement Ravelling Shoving
Breaking Rut (Drainage
depth* &
Type Size Size Size Size Size Size Size Size (mm) Shoulder
Area Area Area Depth Area Area Area Area Area
(m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) Condition)
(m2) (m2) (m2) (mm) (m2) (m2) (m2) (m2) (m2)
(L x B) (L x B) (L x B) (L x B) (L x B) (L x B) (L x B) (L x B)

*to be measured with 3m straight edge

Checked by: Recorded by:

Format as per IRC:82-2015
2.4 Pavement Condition Rating

For pavement condition rating or evaluating sections of unifrom perforamce

the method as prescribed in IRC:80-2015 may be followed. The method
precribes assigning a rating value for each categories of distress based on
quantity of that particular distress in the pavement. Final rating value for a
pavement section is calculated by taking average of the wighted rating value
of all the parameters (distress) based on a fixed weightage value or multiplier
factor. Mathmatecillay, it is expressed below:
𝑛
1
Pavement Rating Value (PVR) = ∑ 𝑟𝑖 𝑤𝑖
𝑛
𝑖=1
where, n = nos. of distress type
ri = rating value of each distress based on quantity
wi = wightage value or multiplier factor for each distress type.

The pavement condition is termed as poor, fair and good based on over all
rating value 1.0, 1.1-2.0 and 2.1-3.0 respectively. Criteria for assigining
pavement rating value for individual distress type and respective fixed
weightage factor for different categories of road are prescribed in IRC:82-
2015. The rating criteria for highways is annexed below for refrence.

For deflection measurement, the pavement rating shall be conducted sub-

section wise. Length of sub-section shall be fixed judiciously based on visual
assessment of the rate of severity of the pavement surface surfaces such
that each sub-section represent the pavement surface having uniform severity
level or similar level of severity (low/medium/high) as far as possible.

Table-1: Pavement Distress Based Rating Criteria for Hihwayas

Distress type Range of Distress

Cracking (%) >10 5 to 10 <5
Ravelling (%) >10 1 to 10 <1
Potholes (%) >1 0.1 to 1 <0.1
Shoving (%) >1 0.1 to 1 <0.1
Patching (%) >10 1 to 10 <1
Settlement (%) >5 1 to 5 <1
Rut Depth (mm) >10 5 to 10 <5
Rating value 1 1.1-2 2.1-3
Condition Poor Fair Good
(Table-5.1 of IRC:82-2015)
For calculation of overall rating for situation where distress having different
category of rating values from poor to good, the following fixed weightage
factor has been prescribed in IRC:82-2015.

Table-2: Weightage (fixed) (multiplier factor)

Sl.No. Parameter Weightage (fixed) (multiplier

factor)

1 Cracking 1.00
2 Ravelling 0.75
3 Potholes 0.50
4 Shoving 1.00
5 Patching 0.75
6 Settlement 0.75
7 Rut Depth 1.00

One typical example for calculation of final rating value for one sub-section of
length 1.0 Km of a Highway is demonstrated below using the rating criteria
and wightage factor as per the method prescribed in IRC:82-2015.

Table-3: Example for calculation of Final Rating of Pavement

Distress type Qty. of Rating value Weightage Weighted

distress (Table-1) (Table-2) Rating
(%) Value

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)=(3) x (4)

Cracking (%) 9 1.2 1.00 1.2

Ravelling (%) 5 1.6 0.75 1.2
Potholes (%) 1.2 1.0 0.50 0.5
Shoving (%) 0.4 1.7 1.00 1.7
Patching (%) 3 1.8 0.75 1.35
Settlement (%) 0.2 2.2 0.75 1.65
Rut Depth (mm) 7 1.7 1.00 1.70
Final Rating value (mean of weighted rating values) 1.33
Condition Fair
For pavement condition rating or for classification of pavement sections as
good, fair and poor etc. the criteria specified in IRC:115-2014 may also be
followed, which is also presented in the following Table-4.

Table-4: Criteria for Classification of Pavement Sections

Classification Pavement Condition

Good Isolated cracks of less than 3.0 mm width in less than 5%

area of total paved surface AND average rut depth less
than 10 mm

Fair Isolated or interconnected cracks of less than 3.0 mm

width in 5 to 20% area of total paved surface AND/OR
average rut depth between 10 to 20mm
Poor Wide interconnected cracking of more than 3.0 mm width
in 5 to 20% area (include area of patching and raveling in
this) of paved area OR cracking of any type in more than
20% area of paved surface AND/OR average rut depth of
more than 20 mm

As per IRC:37-2018, if the area of cracking (fatigue/longitudinall/transverse

etc.) and rutting equals or more than the 20% of the total area of paved
surface, such section may be termed as failed sections. In such section,
deflection measurment need not be taken and alternative rehabilitation
measure such as recyclying or re-constrcution may need to be taken up
depending upon a closer examination.

The data collected during the pavment conditions survey including the other
relevant investigations data such as embankment/cut sections, pavement and
shoulder detail, depth of water table/HFL, drainage conditions, rainfall, traffic
intensity etc. may be complied in to the pavement condition data format as
prescribed by the IRC:115-2014 or in to any other suitable mapping format
for identifying the section of uniform performance for taking deflection
measurement with FWD.

The format prescribed by the IRC:115-2014 in Appendix-I is enclosed below

for reference.
 PROFORMA-3
(Refer Appendix-I & Clause-5.3.4 of I.R.C:115-2014)
PAVEMENT CONDITION SURVEY FOR IDENTIFYING SECTIONS OF UNIFROM PERFORMANCE (FOR ESTIMATING SAMPLE SIZE FOR FED DEFLECTION
MEASUREMENT)

Name of the Road : Date of survey :

Section : Traffic intensity : cv/day year
Lane & carriageway type : Annual rainfall :

Height of Pavement Details

embankm Bituminous Depth
Lane Granular Base Granular Sub-base Type of
Sl. ent Pavement surfacing of Drainage
Positi From To Should Remarks
No. /depth of Condition2 water Condition
on1 Thickness Thickness Thickness er
cutting Type Type Type table
(m) ‘mm’ ‘mm’ ‘mm’

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Note: 1. Identify the carriageway/lane position/paved shoulder

2. Classify pavement as good, fair and poor as per pavement rating criteria
3. Report any special/abnormal conditions such as flooding, overtopping, failed section, previous failure history (if any ) etc.
4. Distress data may be collected separately using the suitable mapping format
2.5 Pavement Investigation

Pavement investigation involves identifying type, layer thickness and test on

materials of pavement layers to identify the causes of distress and to
determine the layer moduli.

Pavement layer thicknesses are essential inputs to the process of

backcalculation of layer moduli and, in turn, to the estimation of remaining
life and overlay requirements of the in-service pavement. The layer moduli
specially of subgrade layer determined form laboratory testing of pavment
layer sample will be helpful in detrmining the ranges of modular and in
validating the moduli backcalculated from analysis.

Hence, it is necessary that accurate information is collected about layer

thicknesses from different sources and tests on materials of pavement carried
out invariably. Layer thicknesses can be obtained from historical data, by
coring bound layers and/or by excavating test pits and/or through the non-
destructive technique of Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) survey.

The most effective method of pavement investigation for determining layer

thickness and tests on pavement layers is by digging test pit at suitable
spacing along the outer edge of the outer lane of pavement. It is
recommended that 0.6 m x 0.6 m test pits be excavated at 1.0 km interval or
at suitable larger interval where other records suggest uniformity of pavement
composition in such larger sections.

Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (DCP) tests may be conducted on the subgrade

layer exposed in the test pits to obtain the Dynamic Cone Penetrometer value
for in-situ subgrade. The DCP values obtained with a 60° cone can used to
estimate the backcalculated modulus value of subgrade layer using equation
as below (Kumar, 2001 ). These values can be used for selection of modulus
range for subgrade in the backcalculation process.

𝐄𝐬𝐮𝐛𝐠𝐫𝐚𝐝𝐞 = 𝟑𝟓𝟕. 𝟖𝟕 ∗ (𝐃𝐂𝐏)−𝟎.𝟔𝟒𝟒𝟓

Where, 𝐄𝐬𝐮𝐛𝐠𝐫𝐚𝐝𝐞 = backcalculated modulus of subgrade (MPa)

DCP = Dynamic Cone Penetrometer value (mm/blow)

For inner lanes, it is suggested that cores be taken in the bituminous layers
at 2.0 km interval on the inner lanes and at 1.0 km interval on the outer lanes
(in the case of multi-lane divided or undivided carriageways). The cores
should be examined for type of layers and thickness, crack propagation (from
bottom or top and depth of crack), and de-lamination in the cores. Stiffness
modulus of the bituminous mix can also be determined by conducting
appropriate test (such as ASTM D 7369-09) on the core.
The exercise of pavement investigation by digging test pits and coring shall
be done preferably before the deleflcetion measurement is completed which
may be useful output in evaluating the layer moduli and in determining the
homogeneous pavement section for overlay design. The locations of deflection
test by FWD should coincide with the locations of test pits and cores.
DEFLECTION MEASUREMENT BY FWD 3

3.1 Estimation of sample size and measurement scheme for

deflection measurement

Estimation of sample size for deflection measurement with FWD has been
considered based on the sections of unifrom performance. Sample size should
be larger for a section of ‘poor’ performance compared to sections of ‘fair’ and
good’ performance due to expected large variation in deflection
measurements.

The following equation can be used for estimating the sample size (n).

n = (z * CV)2/(ME2)

where, n = sample size

z = normalized normal deviate which can be obtained from
standard statistical tables for a selected reliability level
CV = coefficient of variation of deflection (standard
deviation/mean) expressed as percentage
ME = acceptable margin of error (as percentage of mean)

IRC:115-2014 recommended the following guidleines for measurement

scheme and spacing of test points for deflection measurements based on 90%
reliabilty level and 10% margin of error for various unifrom section of
performance.
Table-4: Guidelines for Selection of Deflection Measurement Scheme
(As per IRC:115-2014)
Type of Recommended measurement scheme Maximum spacing
Carriageway (m) of test points
per km. of section
Poor Fair Good
Single lane two- i) measure along both outer wheel 60 130 500
way paths
Two-lane two-way i) measure along both outer wheel 60 130 500
single carriageway paths
Four-lane single i) measure along outer wheel paths of 30 65 250
carriage-way outer lanes
ii) measure along the outer wheel path of 60 130 500
more distressed inner lane

iii) measure along the centre line of paved 120 250 600
shoulder (in case of widening projects)
 Four-lane Dual i) measure along outer wheel paths of 30 65 250
(divided) carriage- outer lanes
way ii) measure along the outer wheel path of 60 130 500
(measurement inner lane
scheme given for iii) measure along the centre line of paved
each carriage- shoulder (in case of widening projects) 120 250 600
way)

A unifrom closer spacing scheme for test points based on a higher reliabilty
level than 90% is given below which may be followed :
Table-5: Suggested maximum spacing scheme for test point

Type of Carriageway Recommended measurement Maximum spacing (m)

scheme of test points per km.
of uniform section
Poor Fair Good
For Main carriage- i) measure along outer wheel paths
way (all type) of each lane (for single carriage- 50 100 250
way on both outer wheel paths)
For each paved
i) measure along the centre line of 100 200 500
shoulder in case of
paved shoulder
widening

3.2 Identification of position of wheel path for deflection test

Positions of wheel paths must be identified by observing the surface condition

of the road. If the same cannot be done, the following guidelines can be used
for identifying the outermost wheel path.

The wheel path selected for deflection study must be clearly indicated in the
data sheets used for recording the deflection data. The scheme of wheel paths
and sample size selected for measurement of deflections should not be
changed within a section of uniform performance (good, fair, poor).

Table-6: Suggested maximum spacing scheme for test point

I. OUTER WHEEL PATHS OF OUTER LANES :

For single-lane two-way carriageway 0.6 m from the outer edge of the
outer lane
For two-lane two-way carriageway and 1 .0 m from the outer edge of outer
for multi-lane single carriageway lane
For divided carriageways with two or 0.75 m from the outer edge of outer
more lanes in each direction lne
II. OUTER WHEEL PATHS OF INNER LANES :
For multi-lane single carriageway 4.0 m from the outer edge of the
outer lane
For divided carriageways with two lanes
in each direction
For divided carriageways with three lanes
in each direction
4.2 m from the outer edge of outer
lane
4.2 m from the outer edge of outer
lane for central lane and at 5.2 m
from the outer edge of outer lane for
the lane adjacent to median

3.3 Steps for measuring deflection at a test point

Follwing are the sequence of opeartion generally followed for measuring

deflection with a FWD device at a test point:

1) Mark the test point on the identified wheel path as per the measurement
scheme for the lane of the carriageway.
2) Centre the load plate of the duly calibrated FWD over the test point
3) Lower the loading plate of the FWD device for propoer contact with the
pavement surface.
4) Lower the frame holding the geophones so that the geophones are in
contact with the pavement surface.
5) Raise the mass to a pre-determined height required for producing a target
load of 40 kN (or more as per requirement )
6) Drop one seating load. Observe the load and deflection data of the
geophones recorded on to the computer through data acquisition system
of the FWD. If deflections recorded are observed to be too high or too
small, adjust the mass (weight) for increasing or decresing the target load.
7) Repeat three more load drop and record the load and deflection data in
the data sheet.
8) Raise the geophone frame and load plate and move to the next test
location.
9) Record air temperature at half hourly interval
10) Record pavement surface temperature (optional) if non-contact
temperature sensors are available.
11) Measure pavement surface layer temperature at half-hourly intervals by
drilling holes of 40 mm depth into the pavement surface layer. Fill the hole
with a drop of glycerol. Insert the thermometer into the hole and record
the temperature after three minutes.

FWD devices generally comes with a opearting software and in-built data
acquisition system (DCS) with facilty of automatic as well as manual mode
of opeartion. User need to upload the operating softawre in to a Poratble
Computer and connect it to the data acquisition system of the FWD. Input
like target load, nos. and height of drop etc. are to be given by the
opeartor and machine can be opearted in automated mode or manual
 mode. All the data related to a test drop at a loaction such as peak load,
deflection and velocity measured by the gepohones, air and pavement
surface temparature etc. are automically acquired by the data acquisition
system (DCS) and transferred into the connecting PC. The data file
recorded in to the computer can be analysed and exported in to
spreadsheet or unicode text format for furthur processing. Devices has
also facilities for calibration of load cell, geophones and temparature
sensors etc. FWD software and exact sequence of operations may be
different for different models of FWD but the principle of deflection
measurement is same.

3.4 Precautions for measuring deflection with FWD

1) There should be no standing water on the pavement surface. The loading

plate should be in proper contact with pavement surface. If a non-
segmental plate is used the presence of rutting at test location should be
noted if it affects the contact between plate and pavement surface. The
longitudinal and transverse slope of the pavement should not exceed 10
percent at the test location for accurate measurement of deflection.
Segmental load plate prefreably be used for propoer sitting at cambered
road surface. Rubber pad attached at the bottom of load plate shall be
checked.
2) Deflection measurements should not be made when the pavement
temperature is more than 45°C. Guidelines given in Clause 6.4.3 of IRC-
115 may be followed for deflection measurement in colder areas and areas
of altitude greater than 1000 m
3) Before any operation of load test with a FWD for a project, calibration of
load cell, geophones and temparature sensors (if attached) etc. need to
be done following any approved procedure. The date of calibration should
not be earlier than 365 days from the date of last structural evaluation of
pavements, if any, using FWD.
4) All precautionary measures as instrcuted by the manufacturer for
opearting a FWD device shall be followed.

3.5 Recording of FWD test data

All the data such as peak load, deflections, air temparature, surface
temparature, pavement layer temparature, location and position of test point
on pavement, climatic conditions etc. pertaining to deflection test on a test
point or as recorded in FWD software shall be recorded and complied in the
test proforma prescribed by IRC:115 for furhtur processing.
 PROFORMA-4
(As per Appendix-II & Clause-5.4.7 of I.R.C:115-2014)

PROFORMA FOR RECORDING PAVEMENT DEFLECTION DATA

Name of the Road : Date & time of observation :
Section : Climatic condition : hot/humid/cold
Lane & carriageway type :

Location of test

Pavement Temparature
point Air Temparature °C Peak deflection (mm) observed at a radial distance (mm) of
Lane Position1

Sl. Distanc Peak load

e from Load Drop Remarks
°C
No. applied
Chai carriage No.
(kN) 0 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800
nage way
edge
(m)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
3.6 Processing of laod and deflection data

1. Load and deflection data measured with a FWD should be checked for
unrealistic deflection values and erroneous data. It shall be cheked that
the deflections data shall decrease with increasing distance from the
loading plate and deflection values should not be more than the capacity
of the geophones of the instrument.
2. Load and deflection data for seating load drop (first drop) need not be
considered for backcalculation. Instead an additional load drop may be
made for a minimum of 03 (three) nos. load test per point.
3. If the peak loads corresponding to any or all of the load drops at a test
location are different from the standard target load of 40 kN, then the
deflections values need to be normalized to correspond to the standard
target load.
4. Average values of the normalized load and deflection values
corresponding to all load test at a test location need to be considered
for furthur analysis. For example, if the measured deflection is 0.80 mm
for an applied peak load of 45 kN, then the normalized deflection for a
standard load of 40 kN is 0.711 mm (0.80 * (40/45)).

Following is an extract of an load and deflection data, exported from a FWD

software, corresponding to a load drop conducted at test point of a project.
The data corresponding to all load drops of test points along the length of the
a project, after scrutinzing for unrealsitic and erroneous values, should be
compiled in the proforma-4 above together with all other data as suggested.
The normalized and mean values of the data points may be compiled in the
following tabluar format or in any other suitable proforma for furthur analysis.
Report generated by: GEOTRAN FWD Analysis
Web: www.geotran.in email: support@geotran.in geotran.rke@msn.com

Place: Nagaon
District: Nagaon
Start: 445.00
End: 455.00
Location:
Date: 03-10-2018
Time: 10:30:58
Person: Bilal
Organisation: PWD Nagaon NH Division
Comment:
Laltitude:
Longitude:

PEAK VALUE
Load (kN) Geophone1Geophone2
(mm) Geophone3
(mm) Geophone4
(mm) Geophone5
(mm) Geophone6
(mm) Geophone7
(mm) Air
(mm)
Temp.(°C)
Sur. Temp.(°C)
46.553 0.422 0.277 0.15 0.081 0.049 0.043 0.037 24.7 23.8

Note: Below data from D1 to D7 are velocity of geophone

Load (kN) Geophone1Geophone2Geophone3Geophone4Geophone5Geophone6Geophone7
-1.756 -7.1 -43.7 7 4.8 -4 0 -1.6
-0.22734 0.9 4.3 3 12.8 0 4 6.4
0.086232 4.9 12.3 27 -3.2 0 0 -1.6
2.046056 12.9 12.3 7 -3.2 12 0 -5.6
0.341009 4.9 4.3 -9 8.8 8 40 -1.6
 PROFORMA-5
PROFORMA FOR RECORDING PAVEMENT NORMALIZED AND MEAN VALUE OF DEFLECTION DATA

Name of the Road : Date & time of observation :

Lane & carriageway type : 2L-Dual CW Test Season : monsoon/winter/summer

Normalized deflection (mm) corresponding to Mean deflection (mm) corresponding to Normalized

Section of Unifrom Performance

Temparature °C
Load Drop No.
measured deflection at a radial distance (mm) of deflection at a radial distance (mm) of

Pavement
Lane
Chainage position/
Chainage (KM)
of test

1200

1500

1200

1500

1800
1800
side

300

600

900

300

600

900
No.

0
points
From To (m)
01
Outer
02
lane/LHS
03
315+000
01
Outer
02
lane/RHS
03
01
Outer
02
lane/LHS
03
01 315.0 316.0 315+100
01
Outer
02
lane/RHS
03
01
Outer
02
lane/LHS
03
315+200
01
Outer
02
lane/RHS
03
3.7 Identification of Homogeneous sections for structural design

3.7.1 General
Identification of section of uniform performance as described in Chapter-2 of
the book is primarily intended to select sample size for conducting deflection
test in a pavement. The basis of identification was based on measurment of
surface distresses such as cracking, rutting, depression etc. as pavement
response parameter.
Structural evaluation and corresponding strengthening requirement in terms
of overlay design are done based on backcalculated moduli of in-service
pavement layers with deflection measurement as one of the significant input.
Therefore, sections of uniform performance, identified based on distresses as
as pavement response parameter, will not be appropriate to consider as
homogeneous units for strcutural design. It is prudent to identify
homogeneous sections based on deflections as pavement response parameter
for structural evaluation and optimum design of overlay.

Surface curvature index (SCI), calculated as the difference between deflection

readings at the center of the loading plate and at a radial distance of 300 mm
taken with a FWD device on a pavement, which reflects the contribution of
upper layers of pavement, is generally taken as the pavement responsible
variable for identification of various homogeneous unit. The processes of
identification and delineation of various homogeneous units that generally
exists in a measurement series of a pavement response variable is described
in detail in the below section.

3.7.2 Delineation method for identification of Homogeneous Unit

Figure-6 below illustrates the typical plot of a response variable ‘SCI’ as a

function of distance along a project.

Figure-6: Typical pavement response variable versus Distance plot

for a project.
Measurement of response variable indicates changes from one location to
another with some points experiencing changes of major magnitude. At these
point of significant changes, such as points at the junction of the units (1, 2,
3, 4 and 5) as shown in the figure above, overall response of the pavement
segement on either side will be noticeably different.

The variabilty in response measurement can be traced to two major sources.

The first source of variation is termed as ‘between unit variabilty’ and reflects
the fact that statistically homogeneous units may exists within a
measurement series. The ability to delineate the general boundary location of
this units called as ‘homogeneous section’ is critical because these units or
sections forms the bais for specific analysis to be conducted. For example, for
the variable response depicted in the figure-6 above, five separte
rehabilitation studies may be warranted (i.e. five different overlay design
thciknesses).

The other major sources of variablity is the inherent diversity of the response
variable within each units, termed as ‘within unit variabilty’. Within unit
variabilty is important because it relates to the eventual rehabilitation design
reliabilty. Therefore, proper care shall be undertaken in delineation/
identification of homogeneous units by considering both the ‘between unit
variabilty’ and ‘within unit variabilty’ in a response measurement of a
rehabilitation project. Otherwise, every unit will be either underdesigned
(premature failure) or overdesigned (uneconomical).

Several analytical methods are available for delineation of homogeneous unit,

with recommeded procedure being the ‘Cumulative Diffrence’ approach.

“Cumulative Diffrence is defiened as the difference between the cumulative

area under response curve at any distance and the total area/cumulative area
developed from the overall project average response at the same distane”

Referring to the figure-7(b) below, the cumulative difference, ‘Zx’ at any

distance ‘x’ of a project for a contineous response measurements ri at a
constant interval along the project length ‘Lp’ can be defined as :

Zx=(Ax - Āx)………………….Eq.(A)

Where, Zx= Cumulative diffrence at a distance ‘x’

Ax= Cumulative area under response curve at a distance ‘x’
(response curve is represented by thick slope line in fig-7(b))
Āx= Cumulative area under average response curve at a distance
‘x’ (average response curve is represented by dotted slope
line in fig-7(b))
 AT= Total/cumulative area under the response curve for the
overall length of the project ‘Lp’at a distance ‘x’
ri = project response measurents along the length ‘Lp’ (r 1, r2…,rn
for total nos. of response measurement nt)
xi= distance along the project for response measurements (x1,
x2,…Xn=Lp)

(a)
R2
Pavement response value, ri

R3
R1

x= x1 x x2 x3=Lp
0

(b)
AT
Cumulative Area A= ri dx

Ax
Āx
Zx= Ax - Āx

x= x1 x x2 x3=Lp
0
(c)
Border

(+
Cumulative diff.= Zx

(+ (-)
x1 x2
0
x3=Lp
(+
(-)
Border

(-)

Station/Project distance

Figure-7: Concept of Cumulative Diff. Approach to Analysis of Homogeneous Unit

Figure-7(a) above is a plot of project response variable measurements as a
function of project distance. The plot results in three unique units having
different response magnitude (R1, R2, R3). For delineation of the units,
cumulative diffrence (Zxi) calculated at the different response measurement
interval is plotted against the corresponding project distance (xi). From the
plot, it can be seen that unique boundaries occur where slopes of the curve
(zx vs xi) changes algebric sign (i.e., from the negative to positive or vice-
versa). This fundamental concept is the ultimate basis used to analytically
determine the boundary location for the analysis unit.

The schematic figures shown in figure-7 are derived for response

measurement at equal interval for the simplicity of understandiing the concept
of delineation of homogeneous unit. In practice, measurements are generally
discontineous, frequently obtained at unequal intervals and never constant,
even within a unit. In order to apply the foregoing principle in case of
measurment of response variables at varying intervals, the form ‘Zx’ function
is defined as (AASHTO-1993):

∑𝑛
𝑖=1 𝑎𝑖
𝑍𝑥 = ∑𝑛𝑖=1 𝑎𝑖 − ∑𝑛𝑖=1 𝑥𝑖 Eq.(B)
𝐿𝑝

with
(𝑟𝑖−1 + 𝑟𝑖 ) × 𝑥𝑖
𝑎𝑖 = = 𝑟̅𝑖 × 𝑥𝑖
2

where, n= the nth. pavement response measurement,

nt = total nos. of pavement response measurements taken in a
project
ri = pavement response value of the ith measurement
𝑟̅𝑖 = Average of the pavement response values between the
(i-1) and ith tests
xi = pavement response interval for ith tests
LP = total project length.

A tabular solution sequence for the above, referring to AASHTHO-1993

(Appendix-J) is shown in the Table-7, which illustrate how the solution
sequence progress and the necessary computational steps required for an
unequal interval analysis. An example for delineation of homogeneous units
using the above approach and solution sequence is also presented for a
highway project in the section below.
 Table No-7: Tabular Solution Sequence-Cumulative Difference Approach

Col.
Col.2 Col.3 Col.4 Col.5 Col.6 Col.7 Col.8 Col.9
1
Stati
Pavement Interval
on Interval Cumulative Interval Actual Cumulative
response Distanc Average Interval Cumulative Difference
(Dist Number Distance Interval Area Area
Value e Response (𝑟̅) Zx = Col.8-F*Col.5
ance (n) (ΣΔxi) 𝑖
( ai ) (Σai)
(ri) Δxi
)

Zx1= a1-F* Δx1

1 r1 1 Δx1 Δx1 𝑟̅1 = 𝑟𝑖 𝑎1 = 𝑟̅1 Δx1 a1

Zx2= (a1+ a2) - F*(Δx1+

(𝑟1 + 𝑟2 )
2 r2 2 Δx2 (Δx1+ Δx2) 𝑟̅2 = 𝑎2 = 𝑟̅2 Δx2 a1+ a2 Δx2)
2

Zx3= (a1+ a2+ a3) -

(𝑟2 + 𝑟3 )
3 r3 3 Δx3 (Δx1+ Δx2+Δx3) 𝑟̅3 = 𝑎3 = 𝑟̅3 Δx3 a1+ a2+ a3 F*(Δx1+ Δx2+Δx3)
2

Zxnt= (a1+……+ ant) -

(𝑟𝑖−1 + 𝑟𝑖 )
Lp rn nt Δxnt (Δx1+ Δx2+Δx3 + Δxnt) 𝑟𝑛𝑡 =
̅̅̅̅ 𝑟𝑛𝑡 Δxnt
𝑎𝑛 𝑡 = ̅̅̅̅ a1+……+ ant F*(Δx1+ Δx2+Δx3 + Δxnt)
2

𝐴𝑡
𝐹=
𝐿𝑝

𝐴𝑡 = ∑ 𝑎𝑖
𝑖=1
Example:
Dellineation of Homoeneous Sections by Cumulative Diffrence Approach for design
of overlay for a highway project using deflections measurement by FWD as pavement
response vraiable.
a) Totla length of the highway, =15 Km.=15000m
b) Total no. of interval =34 (unequal)
c) Deflection readings at center of loading plate and at a distance of 300m taken
with FWD are given in the table below:

Normalised Deflection (Df) at a Radial

Interval Chainage/Distance
Distance (mm)
No. (Km)
0 300
1 475.00 0.236117 0.153638
2 475.50 0.308833 0.190185
3 476.00 0.284104 0.190537
4 476.50 0.233141 0.136208
5 477.00 0.320846 0.215113
6 477.50 0.279484 0.190361
7 478.00 0.398634 0.269525
8 478.50 0.282810 0.195933
9 479.00 0.403000 0.209744
10 479.50 0.402000 0.208745
11 480.00 0.370792 0.233255
12 480.30 0.430049 0.259307
13 480.80 0.308988 0.210797
14 481.00 0.305690 0.208148
15 481.50 0.341567 0.239003
16 482.00 0.246567 0.135543
17 482.50 0.341568 0.259089
18 483.00 0.331141 0.215015
19 483.50 0.317439 0.218579
20 484.00 0.362571 0.253617
21 484.30 0.286771 0.197493
22 484.60 0.246567 0.128585
23 485.00 0.347463 0.251578
24 485.50 0.305690 0.198148
25 486.00 0.320846 0.215113
26 486.50 0.398634 0.209510
27 487.00 0.246567 0.117458
28 487.30 0.331141 0.142949
29 487.60 0.238008 0.139817
30 488.00 0.218914 0.123722
31 488.50 0.260149 0.173273
32 489.00 0.331210 0.233161
33 489.50 0.256613 0.169430
34 490.00 0.118426 0.010889
Solution: By Cumulative Diffrence Method

Note:

i) The tabular solution sequence as precribed in Table-7 is used to

calculate the ‘Cumulative difference-Zx’ at different measurement
interval (n) or measurement distance (xi) of the pavement response
paramater (ri).
ii) Cumulative Diffrence as calculated in step above is finally plotted
against the respective measurement distnace (xi) to identify the
boundary between the various homogeneos unit that are exist along the
measurment series of the pavement response values (ri).
iii) For pre-assessment of various homogeneous units that may exist along
the pavement response measurent series, it will be helpful to make a
plot of response measurent variables ((ri) against the measurement
distance (xi).
iv) ‘Surface curvature Index’ has been considered as response
parameter/variable for identifying units. Surface curvature index (SCI)
is calculated as :
Pavement Response Variable, ri (SCI)= D0-D300
where, D0 and D300 are deflection measured at the center of loading
plate of FWD and at a radial distance of 300mm from the center.

A. Calculation of Pavement of Response variable (ri)

Calculation of ‘SCI’as pavement of response variable (ri) is shown in the

table-8 below:

Table-8 : Calculation of Pavement Response variables (ri)

Pavement
Normalised Deflection (Df) at a
Chainage Distance 'xi' Interval response
Radial Distance (mm)
(Km) (m) No. (n) variable, (ri)
0 300 SCI (mm)
(i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi)=(iv)-(v)
475.00 0.00 1 0.236117 0.153638 0.082479
475.50 500 2 0.308833 0.190185 0.118648
476.00 1000 3 0.284104 0.190537 0.093567
476.50 1500 4 0.233141 0.136208 0.096933
477.00 2000 5 0.320846 0.215113 0.105733
477.50 2500 6 0.279484 0.190361 0.089123
478.00 3000 7 0.398634 0.269525 0.129108
478.50 3500 8 0.282810 0.195933 0.086876
479.00 4000 9 0.403000 0.209744 0.193256
 479.50 4500 10 0.402000 0.208745 0.193255
480.00 5000 11 0.370792 0.233255 0.137537
480.30 5300 12 0.430049 0.259307 0.170741
480.80 5800 13 0.308988 0.210797 0.098192
481.00 6000 14 0.305690 0.208148 0.097542
481.50 6500 15 0.341567 0.239003 0.102564
482.00 7000 16 0.246567 0.135543 0.111023
482.50 7500 17 0.341568 0.259089 0.082479
483.00 8000 18 0.331141 0.215015 0.116126
483.50 8500 19 0.317439 0.218579 0.098859
484.00 9000 20 0.362571 0.253617 0.108954
484.30 9300 21 0.286771 0.197493 0.089278
484.60 9600 22 0.246567 0.128585 0.117982
485.00 10000 23 0.347463 0.251578 0.095885
485.50 10500 24 0.305690 0.198148 0.107542
486.00 11000 25 0.320846 0.215113 0.105733
486.50 11500 26 0.398634 0.209510 0.189123
487.00 12000 27 0.246567 0.117458 0.129108
487.30 12300 28 0.331141 0.142949 0.188192
487.60 12600 29 0.238008 0.139817 0.098192
488.00 13000 30 0.218914 0.123722 0.095192
488.50 13500 31 0.260149 0.173273 0.086876
489.00 14000 32 0.331210 0.233161 0.098049
489.50 14500 33 0.256613 0.169430 0.087183
490.00 15000 34 0.118426 0.010889 0.107537

B. Plot of Pavement of Response variable (ri) vs disntance

Figure-8: Plot of Pavement of Response variable (ri) vs disntance

From figure-8, it can be seen that are five homogeneous unit existing in
the series of pavement response measurement series. Boundary between
the homogeneous units are identified using Cumulative diffrence method.
C. Calculation of Cumulative difference (Zx)

Calculation of Cumulative difference (Zx) is shown in the table-9 below.

SCI
Cumulati
Pavement Cumulati Cumulative
Distance Interval Interval ve Average Actual
Chainage response Interval Interval ve Area Diffrence
(xi) Number Distance Interval
(m) Value Respons (Σai) Zx = Col.8-
(m) (n) Δxi Distance Area (ai)
(ri) e
F*Col.5
(ΣΔxi)

475.00 0.00 0.082479 1 0.00 0.00 0.082479 0 0 0

475.50 500.00 0.118648 2 500.00 500.00 0.100563 50.28175 50.28175 -7.233686
476.00 1000.00 0.093567 3 500.00 1000.00 0.106108 53.05375 103.3355 -11.69537
476.50 1500.00 0.096933 4 500.00 1500.00 0.09525 47.62512 150.9606 -21.58568
477.00 2000.00 0.105733 5 500.00 2000.00 0.101333 50.66663 201.6273 -28.43448
477.50 2500.00 0.089123 6 500.00 2500.00 0.097428 48.71419 250.3414 -37.23572
478.00 3000.00 0.129108 7 500.00 3000.00 0.109116 54.55793 304.8994 -40.19323
478.50 3500.00 0.086876 8 500.00 3500.00 0.107992 53.9961 358.8955 -43.71256
479.00 4000.00 0.193256 9 500.00 4000.00 0.140066 70.03304 428.9285 -31.19495
479.50 4500.00 0.193255 10 500.00 4500.00 0.193256 96.62775 525.5563 7.9173628
480.00 5000.00 0.137537 11 500.00 5000.00 0.165396 82.69797 608.2542 33.099899
480.30 5300.00 0.170741 12 300.00 5300.00 0.154139 46.24171 654.496 44.832346
480.80 5800.00 0.098192 13 500.00 5800.00 0.134466 67.23318 721.7291 54.550095
481.00 6000.00 0.097542 14 200.00 6000.00 0.097867 19.57339 741.3025 51.117308
481.50 6500.00 0.102564 15 500.00 6500.00 0.100053 50.0266 791.3291 43.628474
482.00 7000.00 0.111023 16 500.00 7000.00 0.106794 53.39683 844.7259 39.509865
482.50 7500.00 0.082479 17 500.00 7500.00 0.096751 48.37561 893.1016 30.370037
483.00 8000.00 0.116126 18 500.00 8000.00 0.099303 49.65133 942.7529 22.505936
483.50 8500.00 0.098859 19 500.00 8500.00 0.107493 53.7464 996.4993 18.7369
484.00 9000.00 0.108954 20 500.00 9000.00 0.103907 51.95347 1048.453 13.174939
484.30 9300.00 0.089278 21 300.00 9300.00 0.099116 29.73481 1078.188 8.400488
484.60 9600.00 0.117982 22 300.00 9600.00 0.10363 31.08895 1109.277 4.9801766
485.00 10000.00 0.095885 23 400.00 10000.00 0.106933 42.77331 1152.05 1.7411407
485.50 10500.00 0.107542 24 500.00 10500.00 0.101713 50.85671 1202.907 -4.917579
486.00 11000.00 0.105733 25 500.00 11000.00 0.106638 53.3189 1256.225 -9.114115
486.50 11500.00 0.189123 26 500.00 11500.00 0.147428 73.71419 1329.94 7.0846438
487.00 12000.00 0.129108 27 500.00 12000.00 0.159116 79.55793 1409.498 29.127142
487.30 12300.00 0.188192 28 300.00 12300.00 0.15865 47.59497 1457.093 42.212855
487.60 12600.00 0.098192 29 300.00 12600.00 0.143192 42.95747 1500.05 50.661063
488.00 13000.00 0.095192 30 400.00 13000.00 0.096692 38.67663 1538.727 43.325341
488.50 13500.00 0.086876 31 500.00 13500.00 0.091034 45.51693 1584.244 31.326836
489.00 14000.00 0.098049 32 500.00 14000.00 0.092463 46.23138 1630.475 20.042778
489.50 14500.00 0.087183 33 500.00 14500.00 0.092616 46.3081 1676.783 8.8354476
490.00 15000.00 0.107537 34 500.00 15000.00 0.09736 48.67999 1725.463 0
At= 1725.463
Lp= 15000.00
F= At/Lp= 0.115031
 D. Figure-9: Plot of Calculation of Cumulative difference (Zx) VS disntance (m)

HS-2: Ch.478.5 to 480.8

HS-1: Ch.475 to 478.5

HS-3: Ch.480.8 to 486.0

HS-3: Ch.487.6 to 490.0

HS-4: Ch.486.0 to 487.6
Note: Five Homogeneous sections can be identified by locating boundaries where the slope of the Zx vs Distance curve changes
algebric signs. Five different design of overlay therefore need to be done. There may be many more smaller units with
boundaries at smaller intervals for other situations. Adjacent units of smaller length having non-significant changes in
slope may be merged togther, judiciously, for practical construction consideration.
BACK-CALCULATION OF PAVEMENT LAYER
MODULI 4

4.1 Principle of Backcalculation of layer moduli

In structural evaluation and design of overlay by FWD Technique, the modulus
of the various layers of an in-service pavement together with layer thickness
and poisson’s ratio are used in the analysis process for determining the
residual life and overlay requirement of the pavement. The modulus of the
various layers of the in-service pavement are in turn determined by
backcalculation process using various available backcalculation routine such
as such as ELMOD, EVERCALC, BISDEF, NUS-BACK, MICHBACK, MODULUS,
PADAL, etc. The backcalculation routins’ uses FWD measured deflection basins
and intial input of assumed ranges of layer moduli to estimate the final
pavement’s layers’ moduli (E) using mostly the iterative process.

In iterative process, the backcalculation routine uses the input of initial ranges
of modulus values of each layer of the pavement to compute theoretical
surface deflections that are then compared to the measured (FWD) surface
deflections (deflection basin). The initial modulii values are adjusted and the
iteratoin process is continued until the best fit between the computed and the
measured deflection basins is obtained. The process is schematically
explained in the figure-10 below.

Figure-10: Flowchart for the general backcalculation iterative process

Computed ‘E’ ‘E’ adjustment

 measured FWD  comparison

 compute
deflection basin between measured
deflection with
 layer structure & and computed  if error > set
assumed ‘E’ (1st
thickness deflection basin value, adjust ‘E’
iteration) or
 assumed ranges of  Computation of the
iterated E
‘E’ (layer moduli) error

INPUT Error
4.2 ‘KGPBACK’- the backcalculation routine
KGPBACK, a specific version of BACKGA program, which was developed by
the Transportation Engineering Section of IIT, Kharagpur, India under the
research scheme R-81 (2003) of the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways,
Govt. of India, is recommended by the Indian Road Congress (IRC) guidelines
IRC:115-2014 for backcalculation of layer moduli.
KGPBACK is a Genetic Algorithm based model, uses linear elastic layered
theory in backcalculation of layer moduli. Pavement is considered as three
layer system with the assumption of rough interfaces (with full bonding)
between layers. Layers with similar stiffness can be grouped together.
For example, an in-service flexible pavement can be modelled as a three layer
system with bituminous layer, granualr layer and subgrade. Bituminous layers
such as surface course (SDBC/BC) and binder courses (DBM and/ BM) etc
having same stiffness can be grouped toghether. Similarly, granular base
layers (WBM/WMM) and sub-base layers (GSB) can be combined toghther and
modelled as granualr layer.

Figure-10: Welcome Page of KGPBACK Programme

The layered pavement structure with the following layer properties are
required to be given as inputs in to the backcalculation model for analysis.
1) Measured FWD Deflection Basin
2) Pavment layer thickness.
3) Poisson's ratio values of layers.
4) Assumed ranges of layer moduli ‘E’
The software produces a series of computaion of defelctions and comparision
with the measured FWD deflection basin based on initial assume layer modulii
and adjusted layer modulii through iterative process as described in section
4.1 to find a best fit between the computed and measured deflection. The
layer modulus obtained with the best fitness is considered as fianl value of
backcalculated layer moduli.
Backcalculation using Genetic Algorithom does not require seed moduli. Only
the lower and upper domain bounds of the layer moduli (range of moduli) are
required. Like most other backcalculation programs, KGPBACK, does not
backcalculate Poisson's ratio and thicknesses. Typical values of Poisson's ratio
are selected for the analysis, as Poisson's ratio values (when chosen within
practical range) are not expected to have any significant influence on the
deflections. Thicknesses must be available from construction records, test pit
data, cores or non destructive determination using techniques such as GPR.

A schematic example of layered structure and FWD deflection basin used in

backcalculation process is shown in figure-11 below.

Figure -11: Example of layered structure and deflections utilized in backcalculation

P (Peak load)

Sensors
S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7
Loading plate

D4 D5 D6
Measured Surface Deflections D2 D3
D0 D1
Deflection bowl/basin

r1
r2
r3
r4
r5
r6

Ei = backcalculated moduli Layer-1 E1= f (t1, E1min, E1max, v1)

ti = layer thickness
Ei, min. = minimum modulus
Ei, max. = maximum modulus Layer-2 E2= f (t2, E2min, E2max, v2)
vi = Poisson’s ratio
i = layer no. (i =1,2,3)
Layer-3 E3= f (t3, E3min, E3max, v3)
4.3 Data input process in ‘KGPBACK’
Following is an example of step by step input process for various data that
are required for backcalculation of layer moduli with ‘KGPBACK’
backcalculation. The data are required to be entered in sequence in input page
of the programme on execution of KGPBACK.

Step-I TYPE PEAK FWD LOAD (N), CONTACT PRESSURE

40000 Standard load &

0.56 tyre pressure

Step-II HOW MANY DEFLECTION WERE MEASURED (4 TO 10)?

Nos. of sensors
7 used in FWD
machine. Nos.
sensors may vary
with the type of
FWD used.

Step- PRINT RAD. DISTANCES (MM) WHERE DEFLECTION WERE

III MEASURED

0 Radial distances of
300 the sensors/
600 geophones from
the center of
900
loading plate of
1200 FWD used for
1500 deflection
1800 measurement.

Step- PRINT MEASURED DEFLECTION IN MM

IV
0.432 Deflection
0.285 measured by the
0.154 respective sensors
starting from the
0.090
center of the
0.059
loading plate. of
0.040 FWD.
0.030

Step-V GIVE THE PAVMENT RELATED INPUTS (3-LAYER SYSTEM)

TYPE EACH LAYER THCIKNESS (mm). START FROM TOP

140 Total thickness of

bituminous layers.

450 Total thickness of

granular layers.

Subgrade (not
reqd.)

Step- TYPE POISSON RATIO OF EACH LAYER. START FROM TOP

VI
0.5 Standard values
0.4
0.4
Step- PRINT LOWER AND UPPER BOUND MODULI (MPa) LAYERS Give ranges of
VII layer modulus for
750 each layer,
3000 determined as per
100 the guidline of
IRC-115.
500
For this example-
159 Bituminous layer:
238 750-3000
Granular layers:
100-500
Subgrade:
159-238

Figure -11: A Sample input process in INPUT file of KGPBACK

 Figure -12: A Sample output fille (BACKOUT) from KGPBACK

4.4 Estimation of ranges of layer moduli for backcalculation

Accuracy of backculcalation of layer moduli with ‘KGPBACK’ or in any other
similar backcalculation routine depends on the selection of appropriate ranges
layer moduli. Therefore, these ranges are to be selected judiciously by
experienced pavement engineering taking into consideration the factors that
may effect the strength of an in-service pavement. Following factors may be
may need observation for arriving at appropriate ranges of layer moduli.

1) Approximate age of the pavement.

2) Visual assessment of the condition of bituminous layers.
3) Climatic conditions prevailing at the time of deflection measurement.
4) Modulus values, CBR and DCP values etc. and any other information
available from test pits, cores, DCP tests and laboratory tests etc.
 IRC:115-2014 recommends the following ranges of moduli for
different layers for carrying out back calculation using KGPBACK.

Layer Type Ranges of Elastic Moduli (E)

Bituminous Layer - thick layers 750 MPa to 3000 MPa
without much cracking
Bituminous Layer in distressed 400 MPa to 1500 MPa
condition (Fair to Poor)
Granular Layers (combined) 100 to 500 MPa
Subgrade As per procedure as mentioned below.

 Methods for deciding Subgrade Modulus ranges:

Suggested Method Ranges
I. If no information is available about subgrade : 20 to 100 MPa
II. In-situ Subgrade CBR from DCP Test or : 5*CBR to 20*CBR
laboratory test on soil obtained from test Pits.
III. From DCP test with 60º cone conducted on : Ranges may be
subgrade soil by digging test Pit and using the taken as per above
following expression.

𝑬𝒔𝒖𝒃𝒈𝒓𝒂𝒅𝒆 = 𝟑𝟓𝟕.𝟖𝟕 ∗ (𝑫𝑪𝑷)−𝟎.𝟔𝟒𝟒𝟓

DCP value in mm/blow
IV. Using the average of the surface deflections
measured at extreme 03 nos. geophone
[e.g., deflections measured radial distances
of 1200 mm, 1500 mm and 1800 mm (if
available)] using the following expression.
𝐏 [1.2*(Esubgrade)*0.8] to
𝐄𝐬𝐮𝐛𝐠𝐫𝐚𝐝𝐞 (𝐌𝐩𝐚) = (𝟏 − 𝛍𝟐 ) ∗
(𝟑. 𝟏𝟒 ∗ 𝒓 ∗ 𝒘)
[1.2(Esubgrade)*1.2]
where,
P = Applied Peak load (N)
r = average of radial distances (e.g. avg. of
deflection at radila distance of 1200 mm,
1500 mm and 1800 mm)
μ= Poisson's ratio of subgrade (0.40)
w= average of surface deflections measured
at 1200 mm, 1500 mm and 1800 mm (if
available) radial distances.

The subgrade modulus estimated from the above methods can be used to
narrow down the range of moduli to be used in the back-calculation
 process which can improve the accuracy of the remaining back calculated
moduli.
 Example for calculation of Subgrade Moduli using method-IV above
(Equation III. 2 of Appendix-III, IRC:115-2014) at a test location

Applied Peak load P= 43173 N

Measured Deflection w= 0.064mm, 0.044mm, 0.033mm at radial

distance 1200mm, 1500mm & 1800mm
respectively

Average of radial distances r = (1200+1500+1800)/3=1500mm

Average deflection w=(0.064+0.044+0.033)/3=0.047

Poissons ratio μ = 0.04

Subgrade Modulus 𝟒𝟑𝟏𝟕𝟑

𝐄𝐬𝐮𝐛𝐠𝐫𝐚𝐝𝐞 = (𝟏 − 𝟎. 𝟒𝟐 ) ∗
(𝟑. 𝟏𝟒 ∗ 𝟏𝟓𝟎𝟎 ∗ 𝟎. 𝟎𝟒𝟕)

=165.871 MPa

Subgrade Modulus Ranges [1.2*(Esubgrade)*0.8] to [1.2(Esubgrade)*1.2]

=159.236 to 238.855

4.5 Correction of backcalculated layer moduli

Backcalculated layer moduli obtained from analysis by a back-calculation
software (e.g. KGPBACK) needs to be corrected for temperature and seasonal
variation, where required, as per the method as detailed below.

4.5.1 Correction for Temperature

For areas in India having a tropical climate, the standard pavement
temperature is recommended as 35°C. If the deflection measurement by FWD
in a tropical climatic area is carried out in a pavement temperature other than
the standard temperature of 35°C, the back calculated layer moduli as
obtained from analysis need to be corrected. Following method is
recommended in IRC-115.
The backcalculated modulus of bituminous layer obtained from deflection
survey conducted at a temperature "T2” °C can be corrected to estimate the
modulus corresponding to a temperature of "T1” °C using equation as stated
below (Reddy, 2003).
 𝐄𝐓𝟏 = 𝛌𝐄𝐓𝟐
where, λ= temperature correction factor, is given as
1 − 0.238 lnT1
𝜆=
1 − 0.238 lnT2
where,
ET1 = backcalculated modulus (MPa) at temperature T1 (°C) (T1 = 35°C)
E T2 = backcalculated modulus (MPa) at temperature T2 (°C)
(T2 = pavement temperature at which deflection test carried out
at site)
Note:
1. Above temperature correction factor was developed for a pavement
temperature range of 25°C to 40°C. Therefore, for using the above
temperature correction formula, deflection test shall be carried at the
time of pavement temperature in the range of 25°C to 40°C, which
however can be extrapolated up to a temperature range of 20°C to 45°C.
2. Pavement temperature shall be taken with a thermometer at each ½
hourly interval by digging 40mm deep hole in the pavement during the
deflection test is carried out.
3. Temperature correction need not be applied to backcalculated modulus
values of thin bituminous layers (less than 40 mm) and for "Poor"
sections.
4. Pavement deflection measurement shall not be taken where the average
daily temperature is less than 20°C and more than 45°C.
5. In colder areas and areas of altitude greater than 1000m, where the
average daily temperature is less than 20°C for more than 4 months in
a year, the standard pavement temperature of 35°C will not apply. It is
recommended that deflection measurements in such areas be made
when the ambient temperature is greater than 20°C. No temperature
correction needs to be applied for backcalculated moduli of bituminous
layers in this case.

4.5.2 Correction for Seasonal Variation

1. Moisture content affects the strength of subgrade and granular

subbase/base layers. The extent to which the strength is affected will
depend on the nature of subgrade soil, gradation and nature of fines
in the granular layers, etc. It is recommended that the pavement
deflection measurement shall be carried out during the period of
recession of monsoon when the subgrade is at its weakest condition.
 2. Where the same is not feasible, a correction procedure should be
adopted to the backcalculated modulus, when deflection test is carried
out either at winter or summer season using the Equation (6), (7), (8)
& (9) of IRC-115 for converting to the equivalent layer moduli during
monsoon season.
3. The equation and their applicability are presented in the table below.

Test Ref. IRC-

Layer Equivalent modulus in monsoon period
Season 115
Subgrade Winter Eq-(6)

Summer Eq-(7)

Esub_mon= subgrade modulus in monsoon

(applicable for value more than 20
MPa)

Esub_win= subgrade modulus in winter

(applicable for value more than 30
MPa)

Esub_sum= subgrade modulus in summer

(applicable for value more than 30
MPa)

Granular Winter Eq-(8)

Summer Eq-(9)

Egran_mon= granular modulus in monsoon

(applicable for value more than 60
MPa)
Egran_win= granular modulus in winter
(applicable for value more than 80
MPa)
Egran_sum= granular modulus in summer
(applicable for value more than 100
MPa)
STRUCTURAL EVALUATION &
OVERLAY DESIGN 5
5.1 General
Overlays are mainly intended to increase the structural capacity i.e., load
carrying capacity of in-service pavements that have lost due to development
of distresses caused by the increasing traffic, repetitive wheel loads and other
climatic conditions during the design life of a pavement. The distresses may
include cracking, rutting, distortion and disintegration of pavement etc.
Several type of distress (e.g., distress caused by poor construction technique
and construction, inferior materials, inadequate thickness etc.) are not initially
caused by traffic loads but do become more severe to the point that they also
detract from the load carrying capacity of the pavement. Sometimes, there
may be no directly observable indication of distress but there is reduction in
structural capacity in terms of future traffic. Therefore, it is prudent to
undertake pavement evaluation to ascertain the residual structural capacity
that a pavement is possessing so that appropriate overlay design can be
developed for enhancing the load carrying capacity of the pavement.

5.2 Remaining life method for structural evaluation

There are different methods of structural evaluation using empirical as well as
mechanistic-empirical approach. Among the methods, remaining life
methods, which uses fatigue and rutting damage concept is mostly used.
Remaining life can be assessed by estimating the total amount of traffic for
which the pavement was initially designed for and subtracting it from the
amount of traffic already carried by the pavement.
With the advancement of pavement design using mechanistic-empirical
approach and linear elastic models for analysis of pavement, remaining life of
an in-service pavement is determined directly by estimating the levels of
critical mechanistic parameters such as stress or strain reached in the
pavement corresponding to identified structural distresses responsible for
performance of the pavement. The values of critical stresses or strains
reached in an in-service pavement are compared with the permissible values
obtained from the respective performance model in order to judge the
adequacy of a pavement to cater future design traffic and accordingly overlay
is designed where required.

5.3 Mechanistic-empirical philosophy for flexible pavement design

and structural evaluation
The rationale of mechanistic-empirical method of pavement design is that,
corresponding to selected structural distresses, responsible for functional and
structural performance of a pavement, critical mechanistic parameters are
identified and controlled to an acceptable (limiting) value in the design process
with respect to defined performance model.
Structural evaluation and design of overlay using FWD technique presented in
this book follows the method prescribed by the IRC:115 and pavement design
method as per IRC:37. The flexible pavement design procedure as prescribed
by the IRC:37-2012 and 2018, using mechanistic-empirical approach
considers fatigue cracking in bituminous layers and rutting in subgrade as
failure criteria. The cracks developed in the bottom of bituminous layers
(bottom up cracking) and rutting or deformations caused in the top of the
subgrade layer due to repetitive wheel loads of traffic eventually appears as
connected or web cracks in the surface and rutting/depression in the wheel
paths respectively. The corresponding critical mechanistic parameters for
fatigue and rutting are identified as tensile strain at the bottom of the bottom
most layers of bituminous layer and vertical stress on the top of the subgrade.
For controlling of the above mechanistic parameters or for limiting values of
strains, code IRC:37 prescribed two different performance equation or
performance models for 80% and 90% reliability case based on fatigue and
rutting failure criteria. The models are presented in the following section.
For satisfactory performance of bituminous pavements and to ensure that the
magnitudes of distresses are within acceptable levels during the service life
period, the guidelines recommend that pavement sections be selected in such
a way that they satisfy the limiting stresses and strains prescribed by the
performance models adopted in the guidelines for subgrade rutting, bottom-
up cracking and fatigue cracking of cement treated bases.
The code also recommended the use of an analytical tool viz., IITPAVE, a
linear elastic model software developed based on the above said mechanistic-
empirical philosophy for analysis of flexible pavement design. In mechanistic-
empirical method, the theory selected for analysis of pavements is linear
elastic layered system theory in which the pavement is modelled as a multi-
layer system.
For structural evaluation of in-service pavement by remaining life method,
using above said mechanistic-empirical philosophy, the pavement is modelled
as three-layer system in the analytical model ‘IITPAVE’ and the critical strains
for fatigue and rutting are evaluated and compared with the permissible
strains as obtained from the respective performance model corresponding to
a design future traffic. For deficient pavement, overlay is designed using the
same design philosophy and analysis procedure as aforesaid. Detail analysis
procedure for structural evaluation and design of overlay is discussed in the
remaining sections.
5.4 Pavement Analysis using-IITPAVE

IITPAVE software is a modified version of FPAVE, developed under MoRTH,

Govt. of India, Research Scheme R-56 “Analytical and design of Flexible
Pavement”. It is a multi-layered linear elastic analysis model in which a
pavement is modelled as multi-layer system considering the behaviour of the
pavement as resilient (elastic) and linear on an application of a load.

For analysis of flexible pavement with IITPAVE, one set of wheel load (either
with single wheel or dual wheel arrangement) of required axle load (single
axle) is applied over the pavement surface and the resulting pavement
response for critical mechanistic parameters such as stresses, strains and
defections caused at different locations of pavement are found out. The load
distribution is considered as uniform over a circular contact area under each
single wheel/dual wheel set. The effect of additional loads (which should also
be uniformly distributed loads over circular contact areas) are considered
using superposition principle.
P=20 kN P=20 kN

310 mm
d

d/2

Figure -13: A Dual wheel set of Standard Axle Load of 80kN

For the purpose of design of pavement with granular base, one set of dual
wheels of a standard single axle load of 80 KN, each wheel carrying 20 kN
load with centre to centre spacing of 310 mm is applied over the pavement
surface. Load corresponding to each wheel is described by giving single wheel
load (20 kN) and tyre pressure of 0.56 Mpa and analysis for dual wheel
arrangement is carried out.

For other analysis purpose, such as for carrying out cumulative fatigue
damage analysis of CTB layers, different axle loads are applied. For this, the
IITPAVE will run with different single wheel loads corresponding to the axle
load considered. For example, if tensile stress due to an axle load of 100 kN
is to be calculated, a single wheel load of 25,000 (N) is given as input with
recommended tyre pressure of 0.80 MPa and analysis is carried out with dual
wheel arrangement. For estimating effective subgrade strength, analysis with
single wheel arrangement, with wheel load 40000(N) corresponding to
standard axle load of 80 KN (single axle) and with recommended tyre pressure
of 0.56 MPa is considered.

The pavement inputs required are elastic properties (elastic/resilient moduli

and Poisson’s ratio values of all the pavement layers) and the thicknesses of
all the layers (excluding subgrade). IITPAVE software, in its current version,
can be used to analyse pavements with a maximum of five layer including
subgrade. If the number of layers in the pavement is more than five, different
layers of similar nature (e.g. granular, bituminous) can be combined and
considered as one layer. Cylindrical co-ordinate system is followed in the
program. Thus, the location of any element in the pavement is defined by (a)
depth of the location of the element from the surface of pavement and the
radial distance of the element from the vertical axis (of symmetry) along the
centre of the circular contact area of one-wheel load.
A schematic of inputs for analysis of a three-layered flexible pavement system
with respect to standard axle load of 80kN is shown in the figure-14 below.

P P

Dual Wheel Set

Layer-1: Bituminous layer (t1, E1, v1)

Layer-2: Granular layer (t2, E2, v2)

Layer-3: Subgrade (E3, v3)

Ei = backcalculated moduli values form KGPBACK

ti = layer thickness
vi = Poisson’s ratio
i = layer no. (i =1, 2 ,3)
P = Single wheel load (20000 N)
p = tyre pressure (0.56 Mpa)

Note: Wheel set= 02. Subgrade thickness input not required.

Figure -14: Schematic of wheel load and pavement inputs in IITPAVE

 Table-9 : Salient features of IITPAVE
a) Analysis Condition

Material Response Model Linear elastic model

Layer interface condition Fully bonded (all layers)

No. of wheels 20 kN on each single wheel (dual wheel)

0.56 MPa for granular base system

Contact stress of wheel
Pavement inputs required
Nos. of layer supported (in 05 (five) including subgrade.
2018 version)
Co-ordinate system
0.80 MPa for Cement treated base
Elastic/resilient moduli and Poisson’s ratio
values of all the pavement layers. Thicknesses
of all the layers (excluding subgrade)
 Different layers of similar nature (e.g.
granular, bituminous) can be combined
and considered as one layer.
 Modified subgrades may be treated as
part of subgrade.
 Cemented sub-bases may be treated to
be a part of granular layer.
 Cemented base, unless the pavement is
being evaluated for its remaining life
within a short period after construction,
the cemented layer may be treated as
part of granular layer
Cylindrical.
 Depth of the location of an element
defined from the surface of Pavement.
 Radial distance of the element from the
vertical axis (of symmetry) along the
centre of the circular contact area of
one-wheel load.

b) Critical Mechanistic Parameters

Bituminous layer Tensile strain at the bottom of the bottom
most layer
Cement treated base Tensile stress and strain at the bottom.

Subgrade Compressive strain at the top.

5.5 Structural Evaluation of in-service pavement using IITPAVE

5.5.1 For structural evaluation of in-service flexible by remaining life

method, pavement is required to be modelled as three-layer system in
IITPAVE software with the inputs of wheel load and layer properties as
described in the preceding section no-5.6. The software on analysis, gives the
output of strains and stress at specified critical locations of the pavement
system, following mechanistic-empirical pavement design method of the
guide line IRC :37.

As per IRC :37, vertical strain on top of subgrade and horizontal tensile strain
at the bottom of bituminous layer are considered as the critical mechanistic
parameters for performance of flexible pavement with granular base and sub-
base system. Similarly, horizontal tensile stress and horizontal tensile strain
at the bottom of the cement treated base layer are critical for the performance
of CTB bases.

The location of critical strains for a flexible pavement system with unbound
granular layers is shown in figure-15 below. For the location of critical strains
and/or stress for other type of base system, such as stabilised/treated layer
with without crack relief layers, reference to section-3.8 of IRC:37-2018 may
be made.

0.00 0.155 mm

Figure-15: Typical Pavement Section showing locations of Critical strains.

Vertical strain on top of subgrade and horizontal tensile strain at the bottom
of bituminous layer are mainly responsible for rutting and fatigue cracking in
the pavement due to repeated traffic loads and they need to be controlled
with respect to performance models for ensuring satisfactory performance of
flexible pavements during considered service life. The models are described
in the next sub-section 5.5.2.

5.5.2 IRC:37-2018 prescribed two different performance models for

80% and 90% reliability case based on fatigue and rutting failure criteria.

1) Fatigue Model for Bituminous Layer

−04
1 3.89 1 0.854
Nf = 1.6064 ∗ C ∗ 10 [ ] ∗ [ ] 𝑓𝑜𝑟 80% 𝑟𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑎𝑏𝑖𝑙𝑡𝑦
𝜖𝑡 MRm

1 3.89 1 0.854
Nf = 0.5161 ∗ C ∗ 10−04 [ ] ∗ [ ] 𝑓𝑜𝑟 90% 𝑟𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑎𝑏𝑖𝑙𝑡𝑦
𝜖𝑡 MRm

Where, C =10M, M = 4.84(Vbe /(Va+Vbe)-0.69)

Va = per cent volume of air void in the mix used in the bottom
bituminous layer and
Vbe= per cent volume of effective bitumen in the mix used in the bottom
bituminous layer
Nf = fatigue life of bituminous layer (cumulative equivalent number of
80 kN standard axle loads that can be served by the pavement
before the critical cracked area of 20% or more of paved surface
area occurs),
єt = maximum horizontal tensile strain at the bottom of the bottom
bituminous layer (DBM) calculated using linear elastic layered
theory by applying standard axle load at the surface of the
selected pavement system
MRm=Resilient modulus (MPa) of bituminous mix used in the bottom
bituminous layer, selected as per the recommendations contained
in the guidelines.

Factor ‘C’ should be calculated as per the properties considered in the design
mix of bituminous layer. For mix design properties, Va=4.5%, Vbe=11.5%
(corresponding to bitumen content of approximately 4.5 per cent by weight
of total mix), the above equation for 90% reliability case becomes,
 −04
1 3.89 1 0.854
Nf = 0.711 ∗ 10 [ ] ∗ [ ] 𝑓𝑜𝑟 90% 𝑟𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑎𝑏𝑖𝑙𝑡𝑦
𝜖𝑡 MRm
2) Rutting Model for Subgrade Layer

−08
1 4.5337
NR = 4.1656 ∗ 10 [ ] 𝑓𝑜𝑟 80% 𝑟𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑎𝑏𝑖𝑙𝑡𝑦
𝜖𝑣

−08
1 4.5337
NR = 1.4100 ∗ 10 [ ] 𝑓𝑜𝑟 90% 𝑟𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑎𝑏𝑖𝑙𝑡𝑦
𝜖𝑣
Where,
NR = subgrade rutting life (cumulative equivalent number of 80
kN standard axle loads that can be served by the pavement
before the critical rut depth of 20 mm or more occurs)

εv = vertical compressive subgrade strain calculated using linear

elastic layered theory by applying standard axle load at the
surface of the selected pavement system

IRC:37-2018 recommend 90 per cent reliability performance models for

fatigue cracking of bottom bituminous layer and subgrade rutting models for
all important roads such as Expressways, National Highways and State
Highways having design traffic more than 20 msa.

Maximum/permissible value of horizontal tensile strain ‘єt’ (or єt.max) at the

bottom of the bituminous layer and ‘єv’ (or єv.max) vertical strain on top of
subgrade are calculated from the corresponding performance models of
desired reliability case (80% or 90%) using bituminous mix properties
adopted and design fatigue life (Nf) of bituminous layer and subgrade rutting
life (NR).

5.5.3 Design fatigue life (Nf) and subgrade rutting life (NR) corresponds
to the selected design traffic capacity (Ndes) i.e., cumulative equivalent
number of 80 kN standard axle loads that is proposed to be served by the
pavement during a considered design period (n) before fatigue failure and
rutting failure occurs. The design traffic (Ndes) can be estimated as per the
procedure described in section-4 (Traffic) of IRC:37-2018. Equation for design
traffic is described below:

365 × [(1 + 𝑟)𝑛 − 1]

𝐍𝐝𝐞𝐬 = ×A×D× 𝐹 (𝐸𝑞. 4.5 𝑜𝑓 𝐼𝑅𝐶: 37 − 2018)
𝑟
Where,
 Ndes = cumulative number of standard axles to be catered for during the
design period of ‘n’ years
A = Initial traffic (commercial vehicles per day) in the year of
completion of construction
D = lateral distribution factor (as explained in para 4.5.1 of IRC:37-
2018)
F = vehicle damage factor (VDF)
n = design life period, in years
r = annual growth rate of commercial vehicles in decimal (e.g., for 6
per cent annual growth rate, r = 0.06). Variation of the rate of
growth over different periods of the design period, if available,
may be considered for estimating the design traffic

The traffic in the year of completion of construction may be estimated using

equation 4.6 of IRC:37-2018

𝑨 = P × [(1 + r)x (𝐸𝑞. 4.6 𝑜𝑓 𝐼𝑅𝐶: 37 − 2018)

Where,
P = number of commercial vehicles per day as per last count.
x = number of years between the last count and the year of completion
of construction.

5.5.4 IRC:37-2018 recommended a design period (n) of 20 years for

structural design of pavements for National Highways, State Highways and
Urban Roads. For other categories of roads, a design life of 15 years is
recommended. Pavements for high density corridors, expressways shall
preferably be designed as long-life pavements. Otherwise, for such corridors,
the pavement shall be designed for a minimum period 30 years.
For structural evaluation of an in-service pavement, full design traffic ‘Ndes’
may be considered at par with a new pavement design. However, for
structural strengthening of an in-service pavement with overlay, stage-
strengthening for a lesser design period may adopted only in the case where
subsequent maintenance are mandated and or there is likely hood of
substantial increase of traffic in future. In that case, bituminous layers may
be designed for the stage strengthening period but with a design traffic of
1.67 times the traffic estimated for the stage strengthening period (IRC:37-
2018). If the pavement is designed and constructed for only the design traffic
of stage-strengthening period, the pavement, especially the bituminous layer
including overlay layer, may not have adequate structural condition and may
develop full depth cracking and thus may not be suitable for periodical
maintenance measures such as patching, crack sealing and micro-surfacing.
The granular layers (base and sub-base) and CTB shall be designed for full
design traffic and stage strengthening is not allowed. The period of stage
strengthening by overlay may be considered for a design life of 10 years as
per recommendation of IRC:115 or as per the subsequent maintenance to be
conducted.

5.5.5 For estimation of remaining life of an in-service pavement, the

tensile strain at the bottom of bituminous layers and vertical strain on top of
subgrade computed using IITPAVE software, as said in section 5.5.3 are
compared with the permissible values of strain calculated using the
performance models as described in section 5.5.2. If the computed tensile
strain and vertical strain are found exceeded their corresponding permissible
value, the pavement is considered deficient in catering the traffic loads and
may require strengthening by overlay to cater the future traffic loads during
the considered design period.

5.6 Input process and operation of IITPAVE

Detail input process and operation of IITPAVE for analysis of an in-service
pavement is illustrated below with an example. In-service pavement is
required to be modelled as three layer system with i) bituminous layer, ii)
Granular layer & 3) Subgrade layer. Required inputs for wheel load and
material properties are given sequentially and pavement is designed as per
the process of design & analysis of a new pavement.

Step-I. On clicking on the IIT_PAVE.exe file in the installed folder of the

Software (IRC_37_IITPAVE), IITPAVE start screen will appear as
shown in figure below.
Step-II. Click on Design New Pavement Section to give inputs for
analysis of the selected pavement section. Click in the Edit
Existing File in case of giving data input through an Input file or
for editing an existing file.

Step-III. After clicking tab Design New Pavement Section or Edit

Existing File, the Input Page appears on the screen. Give input
in sequential manner as per the unit system as depicted in the
input file. Use Tab or Mouse for scrolling through the Tabs.
In Put page with detail of input to be given considering a
three-layer flexible pavement system (Bituminous surface
+binder layer, Granular Base + Granular Sub-base layer &
Subgrade) is explained below.

Step-IV. INPUT Page of IITPAVE

Various inputs as shown above are explained in table-10 below:

 Table-10 : Illustration of INPUT page of IITPAVE for analysis of an
existing pavement
Input Value Remark
Nos. of layers 03 Layer-1: BC + DBM =140mm - Bituminous
Layer-2: WMM+GSB =500mm -Granular
Layer-3: Sub-grade =500mm

Elastic Modulus (MPa) 3000  The values shown are pertaining to design
of layers 450 of a new flexible pavement.
75  For analysis of an in-service pavement,
backcalculated layer moduli from KGPBACK
and corrected for temp. & seasonal variation
shall be entered for each layer.
Poisson’s ratio of 0.35 Standard values.
layers 0.35
0.35
Layer thickness 140 Layer thickness for subgrade layer need not
500 be entered.

Wheel load (N) 20000
Tyre Pressure (Mpa)
Analysis points reqd.
Load corresponding to single wheel of the pair
of wheels (dual wheels) on one side of a
standard single axle load of 80 kN.
0.56 For analysis of critical strains in a flexible
pavement system with unbound/treated base.
04  Analysis at critical points of strains.
 For flexible pavement with granular base &
sub-base system, there will be 04 points.
02 nos. each at the bottom of bottommost
bituminous layers and on top of subgrade
layer at a radial distance 0.00m and 155mm
from the center of the circular contact area
of wheel load selected. Refer, figure-15,
location of critical strains diagram.

Depth & corresponding 140 0 Depth & radial distance of 04 nos. analysis
radial distance of 140 155 points as stated above.
analysis point. 640 0
Unit in ‘mm’ 640 155
Wheel Set 02 Since analysis is done w.r.t dual wheel, on
one side of a single axle standard wheel load
of 80 KN, choose 2-Dual wheel.

Step-V. After all the inputs are entered submit them by Clicking on
‘Submit’. To change the data submitted use “Reset” option.
Clicking “HOME’ will take to the start screen.

Step-VI. After successfully submitting the inputs use the “RUN” options
which will appear next to “Submit” after the inputs are submitted.
Step-VII. After successful execution of ‘RUN’ the screen of output page
showing the output values for the input data appears. Screen Shot
of an Output file is presented below.

The output page reports all the input data and gives the computed values of
identified stresses, strains and deflections for the locations (represented by
the depth (Z) of the location measured from pavement surface, and the radial
distance (R) of the location measured from the centre of the circular contact
area of the load) selected.

The mechanistic parameters reported in the output page are: vertical stress
(SigmaZ), tangential stress (SigmaT), radial stress (SigmaR), shear stress
(TaoRZ), vertical deflection (DispZ), vertical strain (epZ), horizontal
tangential strain (epT), and horizontal radial strain (epR)

For locations on the interface of any two layers, the analysis will be done
twice: (a) assuming the elastic properties (elastic modulus and Poisson’s
ratio) of the layer above the interface and then (b) with the elastic properties
of the layer below. The second set of results, for the layer below the interface,
are identified in the output by the suffix “L” appearing after the depth (Z)
value.
Step-VIII. For the results of pavement analysis presented in the screen shot
of the output page, the critical mechanistic parameter horizontal
tensile strain (εt) will be the larger of the tangential (epT) and
radial strains (epR) at the bottom of the bituminous layer (layer
above the interface between bituminous layer and granular layer).
Thus, horizontal tensile strain (εt) will be taken as 0.001283
(0.1283*10-3). Note that the values have been taken from the
upper of the two sets of results reported for the interface between
the bituminous layer and granular layer (at a depth of 140 mm).
Similarly, for this pavement, vertical compressive strain (εv) will
be taken from the results corresponding to the lower (with “L”) of
the two sets of results available for the interface between granular
layer and subgrade. Thus, the vertical compressive strain (εv)
value of 0.002053 (0.2053*10-3) shall be used to verify whether
the pavement section considered is adequate or not.
Positive stresses and strains are “tensile” whereas Negative
stresses and strains are “Compressive”. Only the absolute values
without the (+) or (-) sign will be used in the performance models.
5.7 Design of overlay
5.7.1 General
As said in previous section 5.5.5, when an in-service fails to satisfy the rutting
and fatigue criteria from respective performance model i.e., when remaining
life of an in-service pavement in terms of fatigue and rutting life is less than
the required design traffic, strengthening with a bituminous overlay becomes
necessary to augment its life. The design of overlay is done by selecting
suitable trial thickness of overlay of an appropriate material to be laid over
the prepared surface of the in-service pavement and the combination of
existing pavement and overlay will be analysed as a four-layer system in
IITPAVE. Final thickness is decided by trial and error until the fatigue and
rutting criteria are satisfied for the assumed design traffic. The steps for
design of overlay is illustrated in the following section.

5.7.2 Overlay design procedure

a) Selection of mix type for overlay
A suitable layer type for overlay as surfacing course and or binder course
should be selected depending on the design traffic to be withstand by the
overlay course. Recommendation of relevant IRC specification and MoRTH
specification shall be referred. Recommendation of IRC:37-2018 for selection
of mix type for surfacing course and base/binder course is for flexible
pavement design is presented below. Same may be adopted for overlay
design also.

Table-11 : Bituminous layer option recommended by IRC:37-2018

Surface Course Base/binder
Sl. Traffic course
No level Mix type Bitumen type Mix Bitumen
. type type
> 50 Stone Matrix Asphalt Modified bitumen or DBM VG40
1 msa (SMA) VG40
Gap Graded mix with Crumb rubber modified
rubberized bitumen bitumen (CRMB)
(GGRB)
BC With modified bitumen
20-50 SMA Modified bitumen or DBM VG40
2 msa VG40
GGRB Crumb rubber modified
bitumen (CRMB)
BC Modified bitumen or
VG40
 <20 BC/SDBC/PMC/MSS/ VG40 or VG30 DBM VG40 or
3 msa1 Surface dressing / BM VG30
(besides SMA, GGRB
and BC with modified
bitumen)

1For express and national highways, even if the design traffic is less than
20msa, VGA 40 or modified bitumen shall be used for surface course and the
VG40 bitumen shall be used for the DBM.
Special Case:
 Mastic Asphalt can be used for the roads in high rainfall areas and junction
location.
 BC/SDBC with VG30 is recommended if total bituminous layer requirement
is less than 40mm.
 VG10 may be used in snow bound location.

b) Bituminous Mix design and the mix resilient modulus:

The design Resilient Modulus ‘Mr’ of bituminous layer (DBM plus the surfacing)
to be used for new pavement design or an overlay course is the most
important factor impacting fatigue cracking of pavements. Resilient modulus
of bituminous mixes depends upon the grade of binder, frequency/time of
load application time, air voids, surface texture of aggregate, aggregate
gradation, maximum size of the aggregate, bitumen content etc. A bituminous
layer with higher bitumen content and lower air voids gives better resistance
against fatigue and moisture damage. Therefore, it is important that the
correct mix proportioning or mix design is selected for a well performing
resilient mix.
For long-life of the bituminous pavements, to avoid moisture induced
distresses and for better bottom up fatigue resistance, bitumen rich DBM
bottom layer has been recommended in the guidelines IRC:37-2018. The
upper limit of voids filled with the bitumen (VFB) for such bottom rich mixes
shall be 80%.
For the single layer DBM, the recommended target air void content for mix
design is 3.5%. The 3.5% air void content and the corresponding volume of
effective binder content shall be used for calculating the fatigue life using
performance equations for fatigue and rutting. It shall be compacted to 4.5%
or lower air void content in the field.
For two-layer DBM construction, for the bottom DBM Layer, the recommended
target air void content for mix design is 3.0%. The 3.0% air void content and
the corresponding volume of effective binder content shall be used for
calculating the fatigue life using performance equations for fatigue and
rutting. The mix shall be compacted to an air void of 4% or lower in the field.
The effective volume of bitumen (Vbe) to be used in the design mix may vary
for the same bitumen content depending on variations in aggregate gradation
and depending upon the absorption of bitumen by aggregates. Therefore,
during the preparation of DPR, preliminary mix design may be carried out
using the aggregates which are likely to be used in the project to estimate
water absorption, absorption of bitumen and the quantity of bitumen needed
if data from other nearby projects for the same aggregates are not available.
In case the parameters indicated above for rich bottom mixes are not
achievable for any reason, the factor ‘C’, shall be taken as 1.38 for pavement
design purpose.
The design Mr of bituminous layer also varies widely depending upon the
grades of bitumen used in the mix. Irrespective of the bitumen grade,
variability in pavement temperature during a day, over different seasons and
different climatic conditions also influence the value of Mr almost in real time.
Besides, there is variability caused due to the size of test specimens and the
testing methods. The guideline recommended the use of mix type and
bitumen type as shown in the above table-11 for different traffic level. The
modulus value of bituminous mixes prepared with modified bitumen generally
yields lower modulus value as is recommended for surfacing course. The lower
resilient modulus values are due to the larger proportion of elastic/resilient
deformation/strain possible with modified mixes. The smaller resilient
modulus values do not necessarily indicate that modified binder mixes will
have inferior performance compared to unmodified mixes. Instead of high
resilient mix, surfacing layer is required to have high rut and age resistant
mix.
Indicative values of resilient moduli of bituminous mixes with different binders
are given in Table-12 below for design purpose with reference to table 9.1 of
IRC:37-2018. The design of pavement shall be based on the actual values
obtained with field design mixes subject to a maximum value indicated in
Table-12 for the specific mix and for a temperature of 350C. If the resilient
modulus value of the specimens prepared using field mix is more than the
value indicated in Table-12 for the mix and for 350C, the value given in the
table shall be used for design.
Table -12: Indicative values of Resilient Modulus (MPa) of Bituminous
Mixes*
Average Annual Pavement
Mix type Temperature °C
20 25 30 35 40
BC and DBM for VG10 bitumen 2300 2000 1450 1000 800
BC and DBM for VG30 bitumen 3500 3000 2500 2000 1250
BC and DBM for VG40 bitumen 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000
BC with Modified Bitumen 5700 3800 2400 1600 1300
 BM with VG10 bitumen 500 MPa at 35°C
BM with VG30 bitumen 700 MPa at 35°C
RAP treated with 4 per cent
bitumen emulsion/foamed bitumen
(2-2.5) per cent residual bitumen 800MPa at35°C
and 1.0 per cent cementitious
material.
*Note: For the purpose of design
a. resilient modulus measured at 35-degree Celsius temperature as per ASTM
4123 or European standard EN 12697-26 shall be adopted
b. the same indicative modulus values are recommended for BC (surface
course) as well as DBM (binder/base course) with unmodified binders
c. the resilient modulus values for surfacing courses with modified bitumen
shall be taken to be same as the resilient modulus values indicated for DBM

c) Selecting layer thickness

The selection of trial thicknesses of various layers comprising the pavement
overlay, whether single coat surfacing course or surfacing course with
base/binder course should be based on the designers’ experience and subject
to the minimum thicknesses recommended in the Guidelines IRC:37-2018 and
other relevant specifications. Minimum thickness of any compacted layer
should be at least 2.5 times the nominal maximum size of aggregates.
As per specification of IRC: SP:73-2018 and IRC: SP:84, minimum thickness
of overlay course shall not be less than 40mm bituminous concrete after
attending to the requirements of profile corrective course.

d) Structural Analysis of the selected pavement structure

After selecting an appropriate layer type and initial layer thickness for overlay,
the overlay layer along with the existing pavement is analysed as a four-layer
system with the inputs of loads and layer properties using linear elastic
analysis model IITPAVE to find the critical mechanistic parameters. The
procedure of analysis with IITPAVE is same as the analysis process for in-
service pavement as described in preceding section-5.6 except addition of a
new bituminous layer as an overlay course. The properties of overlay course
such as resilient/elastic modulus and poison’s ratio etc. shall be as per the
mix design and testing.

e) Computing the allowable strains/stresses:

The allowable strains in bituminous layer and subgrade for the selected design
traffic are to be computed using the fatigue and rutting performance (limiting
strain) models given in the guidelines IRC:37-2018 and as discussed in the
section 5.5.2. The inputs to the models are the design life of pavement in
terms of cumulative standard axles, the resilient modulus value of bituminous
mix, and volumetric proportions (air voids and effective binder) of the mix.
(f) Doing the iterations:
Analysis with IITPAVE may require few iterations by changing the layer
thickness of overlay until the strains computed by IITPAVE are less than the
allowable strains derived from performance models.
An example of analysis of an in-service pavement with an overlay course is
described in the following section.

5.7.3 Input process and analysis of pavement for overlay design with
IITPAVE
An example of input process for overlay design, considering a layer of
surfacing course with minimum 50mm thick overlay (with 40mm BC+ 10mm
PPC laid together) with VG-40 Grade Bitumen for a design traffic (45 MSA
<50msa) over an existing three-layered flexible pavement is illustrated in the
following table.

Table-13 : Illustration of INPUT page of IITPAVE for design of overlay

Input Value Remark
Layer-1: BC = 50mm - Bituminous Overlay
Nos. of layers 04
Layer-2: BC + DBM =140mm - Exist. Bit. Course
Layer-3: WMM+GSB =500mm -Exist. Granular Course
Layer-4: Sub-grade =500mm

Elastic Modulus
(MPa) of layers
 Modulus value at std. temp. of 35ºC for overlay. Max.
Layer-1 3000 value considered. Actual value shall be as per testing
on design mix.
Layer-2 1711
 Backcalculated layer moduli from analysis with
Layer-3 450 KGPBACK for existing layers.
Layer-4 75
Poisson’s ratio Standard values.
of layers

Layer-1
0.50
Layer-2
0.35
Layer-3
0.35
Layer-4
0.35
Layer thickness

Layer-1 50 Layer thickness of overlay and existing bituminous layers

Layer-2 140 not put together due different resilient modulus values.

Layer-3 500
Layer-4 Subgrade layer need not required to be entered.
 Corresponding to wheel load of a single wheel of Dual
Wheel load (N) 20000 wheel arrangement on one side of a standard single axle
load of 80KN.

Tyre Pressure 0.56 Standard tyre pressure corresponding to pavement

(Mpa) design.
Analysis points 04  Analysis at critical points strains.
reqd.  Analysis for critical tensile strain at the bottom of the
existing bituminous layer
 Analysis for critical vertical strain at the top of the
existing subgrade.
Depth &
corresponding
radial distance
of analysis Depth & radial distance of critical analysis points from the
point. center of the contact area of single wheel load selected.
Unit in ‘mm’
190 0 On bottom surface of existing bituminous layers
190 155
690 0
On top of existing subgrade.
690 155

Wheel Set 02 Dual wheel configuration

The output of the above inputs are given in the OUPUT page of IITPAVE in the
form of stresses, strains and deflections for the analysis locations
(represented by the depth (Z) of the location measured from pavement
surface, and the radial distance (R) of the location measured from the centre
of the circular contact area of the load) selected. Screen shot of an OUTPUT
page and values of critical strains (mechanistic parameters) to be considered
is explained in Step-VII and Step-VIII of Section-5.6 (Input process and
operation of IITPAVE).
The maximum value of the tangential (epT) and radial strains (epR) at the
bottom of the bituminous layer (layer above the interface between bituminous
layer and granular layer) will be considered as value of critical mechanistic
parameter horizontal tensile strain (εt).
Similarly, the maximum value of the computed vertical compressive strain
(epZ) corresponding to the two set of results available for the interface
between granular layer and subgrade layer (represented by “L” after the
depth ‘Z’ i.e. Z=690.00L at R=0 and Z=690.00L at R=155) is taken as the
value of critical mechanistic parameter horizontal tensile strain (εv).
Positive stresses and strains are “tensile” whereas Negative stresses and
strains are “Compressive”. Only the absolute values without the (+) or (-)
sign will be used in the performance models.

The values of max. tensile strain ‘εt’ at the bottom of bituminous layers and
vertical strain (εv) on top of sub-grade as obtained above from analysis is
compared with the corresponding calculated permissible tensile strains
obtained from the performance equations. If the values of strains are found
to be within permissible limits, the overlay thickness considered will be
adequate. Otherwise iterations shall be carried out until the computed strains
from analysis are found within the permissible limits of strains of the
performance models.
 FLOWCHART FOR DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF PAVEMENT BY IITPAVE

DESIGN & ANALYSIS OF PAVEMENT BY Explanation/Note

‘IITPAVE’
03 (three) layers in case of analysis of
existing pavement only

Model Pavement as a layered system

04 (four) layers in case of analysis of
existing pavement with overlay

backcalculated layer moduli in case of

existing layers.
Give input of layer moduli, poison’s
ratios, layer thickness
Estimated resilient modulus in case of
overly layer(s)

Single wheel load of 20000 N & Tyre

Select wheel load & tyre pressure pressure 0.56 MPa for pavement
design & analysis using granular base.

Select analysis locations Analysis locations for critical strains

(depth & radial distance from center below bituminous layer and above the
of load contact area of wheel load) top of subgrade

One set of dual wheels on one side of

a Std. 80kN. single axle wheel load for
Select wheel configuration pavement design & analysis using
granular base.

OUTPUT
(Stress, Strain, deflection, shear etc.) Critical Mechanistic parameters for
pavement design and performance
evaluations are tensile strain at bottom
Find max. value of critical mechanistic of bottom-most bituminous layer and
parameters (strains) from output vertical strain on top of subgrade

Calculate permissible values of tensile

Compare computed values of critical
strain (fatigue strain) and vertical strain
mechanistic parameters (strains) with
the permissible strains (rutting strain) from respective
performance models for estimated
design traffic.
If computed strains < permissible
strains, pavement /overlay design is
adequate and vice versa
6. OUTLINE OF THE PROCESS FOR STRUCTURAL EVALUATION AND DESIGN
OF OVERLAY FOR IN-SERVICE FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT USING FWD
TECHNIQUE FOR INDIAN HIGHWAYS

1. Identification of ‘sub-sections of uniform performance’ (good/poor/fair) in the

road section based on pavement visual condition survey supplemented with
distress measurement for selecting appropriate sample size for conducting
deflection measurement using FWD.
2. Pavement investigation for identification of layer type, layer thickness and
laboratory test on materials of pavement by digging test pits and coring at
suitable interval.
3. Measurement of surface deflections in the various sub-sections of uniform
performance as per the sample size and locations of test points in the
carriageways of the in-service pavement using FWD, measurement of pavement
temperature and recording the measured deflection data, corresponding applied
peak loads, pavement temperature, time of tests etc., other relevant information
as observed during deflection measurement.
4. Processing of measured peak load and deflection data for sorting out the
erroneous deflection measurements, normalizing the correct deflections
measurements w.r.t standard wheel load of 40KN and averaging the normalized
deflections measurements for each test point of various sub-sections of uniform
performance.
5. Identification of ‘Homogeneous Sections’ along the length of the road section as
per Cumulative Difference Method based on ‘surface curvature index’ as
pavement response parameter for structural evaluation and design of overlay.
6. Estimation of initial ranges of layer moduli based on recommended ranges of
values, formulas based on measured deflection data, CBR and DCP values,
laboratory tests on core extracted etc. as per the method prescribed in IRC:115.
Comparing the values of layer moduli estimated using different alternative
procedures as aforesaid and judiciously selecting appropriate ranges of layer
moduli for practical and closer ranges values as far as possible.
7. Backcalculation of pavement layer moduli of the various homogeneous sections
of the in-service pavement with the inputs of normalized mean deflections data
measured with FWD, estimated initial ranges of layer moduli, layer thickness,
poison’s ratio of various layer etc. using appropriate backcalculation routine such
as ‘KGPBACK’ (recommended by the IRC:115)
8. Adjustment of the backcalculated layer moduli of bituminous layers with respect
to standard pavement temperature of 35°C using the correction factors given by
equation nos. 4 and 5 of IRC:115.
9. Adjustment of the backcalculated layer moduli of subgrade and granular layer
moduli to correspond to post monsoon condition using equations 6 to 9 of IRC:
115.
10. Analysis of the in-service pavement by modelling it as three-layer system
(bituminous layer, granular layer and subgrade layer) in any appropriate linear-
elastic pavement analysis model with the input of backcalculated (corrected)
 pavement layer moduli, pavement layer thickness, layers’ poison’s ratio and
desired wheel load configuration etc. to find out the critical mechanistic
parameters such as stress, strains etc. responsible for performance of a
pavement.
‘IITPAVE’ linear-elastic analysis model based on mechanistic-empirical theory of
IRC:37 for design and analysis of flexible pavement is recommended by the
IRC:115 for evaluation of critical mechanistic parameters responsible for
performance of a pavement. The critical mechanistic parameters considered for
performance of a flexible pavement system with granular layer (unbound) are
(a) Horizontal Tensile Strain (fatigue strain) at the bottom fibre of bituminous
layer and (b) Vertical Compressive Strain (rutting strain) on top of subgrade. The
loading configuration for analysis corresponds to the load of a single wheel
(20000 N) of a dual wheel configuration on one side of a single axle standard
wheel load of 80kN.
11. Evaluation of structural adequacy of in-service pavement by comparing its critical
strain levels achieved i.e., (a) Horizontal Tensile Strain (fatigue strain) at the
bottom fibre of bituminous layer and (b) Vertical Compressive Strain (rutting
strain) on top of subgrade computed using IITPAVE with the permissible values
obtained from the respective fatigue and rutting performance models as
prescribed by IRC: 37-2018, corresponding to an estimated future design traffic
considered over a design life.
12. Design of overlay for deficient pavement, if any, by considering a trial overlay
thickness and analysing the pavement system as four-layer system (bituminous
overlay layer, existing bituminous layers, granular layers and subgrade) in
IITPAVE software as per the same procedure as said in step sl.no. 10. The
resilient modulus of the overlay layer shall be as per the value determined from
the bituminous design mix but shall not be more than the value prescribed in
table-12 for the considered mix type.
An overlay thickness will be adequate if the computed critical strains obtained
from analysis with ‘IITPAVE’ software is found within the permissible values given
by the performance models as said in step sl.no. 10
FLOWCHART FOR STRUCTURAL EVALUATION AND OVERLAY
DESIGN BY FWD TECHNIQUE

Pavement Condition Survey & Material Investigation

Determination of Sections of Unifrom Performnce

(Good/Poor/fair) based on pavement condition survey

Determinations of Sample size as per sections of uniform

performance and test location for deflection
measurement

Defelction measurement with FWD on each sections of

uniform performance with a minum of 03 test per
location

Processing Load and deflection Data

(Correction, normlization w.r.t 40 kN load & mean values)

Estimation of initial ranges of layer moduli

Back-calculation of layer moduli by 'KGPBACK' & correction

for temparature and seasonal variation

Determination of Homogenous Sections as per cumulative

diffrence method for structural evaluation and design of
overlay.

Estimation of Design Traffic as per IRC:37 pavement design

method.

Estimation of residual life of pavment by evaluating crtical

strains for the present condition of in-service pavement
using IITPAVE software

Estimation of adequacy of in-service pavement w.r.t fatigue

and rutting performance eqautions of IRC:37 to cater
estimated design traffic

Design of overlay for deficient pavement by analysing with

IITPAVE software and satisfying the performance level of
fatigue and rutting performance eqautions of IRC:37